UC-NRLF 


B   4   sot  S^7 


It''.'  ;  '<vv"'V 


i>Aj'ff:?.:;";i5 


.■-,'■  .^■^X) 


IIUJIIJI  „  II      III  -  '  \   J'\^r  .'•  '    ''  '  ''» 


LIBRARY 

OF   THK 

University  of  California. 

RECEIVED    BY    EXCHANGE 


Class 


FOUNDED  BV  JOHN  D.  ROCKBPKLLER 


OUTLINE  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT 
CHRISTOLOGY 


A  STUDY  OF  GENETIC  RELATIONSHIPS  WITHIN 

THE  CHRISTOLOGY  OF  THE  NEW 

TESTAMENT  PERIOD 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED  TO   THE   FACULTY  OF  THE  GRADUATE  DIVINITY  SCHOOL 

IN  CANDIDACY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

(department  of  new  TESTAMENT  LITERATURE   AND   INTERPRETATION) 


BY 


JOHN  COWPER  GRANBERY 


CHILAGU 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 

1909 


.>? 


w?iB 


Ube  KUniversiti?  of  dbicaao 

FOUNDED  BY  JOHN  D.  ROCKEFELLER 


OUTLINE  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT 
CHRISTOLOGY 


A  STUDY  OF  GENETIC  RELATIONSHIPS  WITHIN 

THE  CHRISTOLOGY  OF  THE  NEW 

TESTAMENT  PERIOD 


A  DISSERTATION 

SUBMITTED   TO   THE   FACULTY  OF  THE  GRADUATE  DIVINITY  SCHOOL 

IN  CANDIDACY  FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF 

DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

(department    of    new    TESTAMENT   LITERATURE    AND    INTERPRETATION) 


JOHN  COWPER  GRANBERY 

n 


CHICAGO 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CHICAGO  PRESS 

1909 


Gr7 


Copyright  1909  By 
Thb  University  of  Chicago 


Published  December  1909 


Composed  and  Printed  By 

The  University  of  Chicago  Press 

Chicago,  Illinois,  U.  S.  A. 


To  all  his  instructors  the  author  makes  grateful  acknowledgment  of 
indebtedness.  He  desires  to  make  especial  mention  of  the  assistance  of 
Associate  Professor  Clyde  Weber  Votaw,  whose  interest,  encouragement, 
and  suggestions  have  contributed  helpfully  toward  this  dissertation. 


o 


944G0 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


Introduction 

Aim,  Explanakjon  of  Charts,  and  Resume. 
Charts — Chronological  and  Genetic. 
Selected  Bibliography. 

I.  Jewish  Messianism         ...... 

II.  The  Messianism  of  Jesus       ..... 

III.  Jewish-Christian  Christology       .... 

rv.  The  Pauline  Christology 

V.  Christology  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  and  Acts 

VI.  Cosmological  Christology  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Colos 

SIANS  AND  THE  EPHESIANS  ..... 


VII.  Christology  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
VIII.   Christology  in  First  Peter  and  First  Clement     . 
IX.  Apocalyptical  Christology  (the  Apocalypse  of  John) 
X.  Christology  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles   . 

XL  The  Johannine  Christology 

XII.  The  Ignatian  Christology 

XIII.  Christology  in  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  and  in  Later  Works 
Concluding  Remarks 


Page 
9 


22 

26 
30 

39 

52 

61 

66 

74 

87 
92 

95 
109 
114 
127 


7J 


INTRODUCTION 

AIM,   EXPLANATION  OF  CHARTS,   AND   R^SUMf 

This  study  surveys  the  entire  period  of  the  New  Testament  history  and 
literature,  ca.  28-160  a.  d.,  and  includes  the  other  extant  Christian  writings 
of  these  years  that  lie  outside  of  the  New  Testament  canon. 

The  effort  is  to  present  types  of  Christology  within  the  New  Testament 
period  in  such  a  way  that  they  will  stand  out  with  their  distinctive  features 
and  in  their  proper  relationships,  and  to  denote  the  character  and  sources 
of  the  conception  of  Christ  in  writings  not  so  fully  christological.  It  is 
not  proposed  to  give  an  exhaustive  study  of  the  several  types.  Important 
questions  are  left  unanswered,  or  the  answer  is  only  vaguely  hinted  at;  for 
example,  the  character  and  extent  of  some  of  the  non-Jewish  influences. 
The  study  is  offered  as  a  contribution  to  the  understanding  of  the  Chris- 
tology of  the  period  chiefly  in  its  bold,  outstanding  features  and  more 
general  relationships. 

The  dates  given  are  not  to  be  taken  rigidly;  they  are  intended  to  be 
suggestive,  and  form  no  essential  part  of  the  charts.  It  is  not  expected  that 
anyone  will  find  all  of  the  dates  acceptable.  In  many  cases  the  evidence 
barely  makes  possible  a  choice  between  different  dates.  The  development 
of  Christology  does  not  move  along  strictly  chronological  lines,  and  yet  it 
is  so  closely  bound  up  with  the  several  periods  that  an  attempt  at  approxi- 
mate dating  is  unavoidable.  It  is  to  be  noted  also  that  a  not  unimportant 
factor  in  determining  the  chronology  of  the  literature  is  the  development 
of  the  christological  thought  itself. 

The  charts  cannot  tell  everything,  and  in  some  instances  may  prove 
actually  misleading.  The  connecting  lines  in  Chart  II  do  not  indicate 
every  relationship — only  the  principal  connections.  For  example,  there  is 
indirect  Alexandrian  influence  in  the  Pauline  Christology,  but  it  is  compre- 
hended only  under  the  very  general  head:  "Gentile  Needs  and  Thought." 
Pauline  influence  is  to  be  found  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  and  the 
Apocalypse  of  John,  but  is  not  sufficiently  direct  and  prominent  to  find 
place  in  the  chart,  unless  the  chart  be  made  so  complicated  as  to  destroy 
its  value.  The  personality  of  Jesus  influenced  in  some  degree  all  types  of 
Christology,  but  it  is  not  deemed  best  to  draw  connecting  lines  in  every 
instance.  The  Matthaean  Christology,  that  of  Polycarp,  James,  etc.,  are 
given  no  visible  connections,  but  this  means  only  that  they  are  products  of 
9]  9 


10  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

the  period,  not  sufficiently  indebted  to  any  special  source  to  call  for  connect- 
ing lines. 

It  is  not  intended  to  suggest  that  Gnosticism  as  such  has  made  actual  con- 
tributions in  every  instance  where  its  influence  is  indicated  by  connecting 
lines,  but  that  under  the  influence  of  the  gnostic  controversy  the  Christology 
in  question  took  on  the  given  form. 

Chart  I  presents  substantially  the  outline  of  this  study.  Chart  II 
exhibits  the  genetic  relationships.  The  succeeding  treatment  presents  the 
evidence. 

For  convenience  a  brief  resume  of  the  results  achieved  is  here  given: 

In  some  of  its  leading  features  Christology  existed  in  the  form  of  Jewish 
messianism  before  Jesus  came.  His  own  ideals  were  nearer  to  Hebrew 
prophetism  than  to  Jewish  messianism;  nevertheless  he  gave  grounds  for 
the  application  to  himself  of  the  messianic  category.  His  purely  personal, 
ethical,  and  reUgious  influence  is  not  estimated  in  this  study,  save  as  it  bore 
upon  the  christological  development.  That  the  rich,  strong,  creative  life 
proceeded  from  and  gathered  about  Jesus  is  not  denied;  the  age  may  well 
have  owed  to  him  first  of  all,  its  freshness  and  power.  But  where  spiritual 
life  is  rich  and  growing,  theology  will  be  undergoing  corresponding  changes 
of  form,  and  it  is  only  with  the  christological  aspects  that  we  are  here  con- 
cerned. The  fact  is  not  overlooked  that  Jesus  impressed  men  as  being 
such  a  one  as  to  require  the  use  of  various  categories  for  the  adequate  evalua- 
tion of  his  person;  all  that  is  affirmed  is  that  Jesus  did  not  create  those 
categories,  nor  explicitly  teach  their  reference  to  himself,  save  that  of  mes- 
siahship  in  a  modified,  transformed,  and  spiritualized  sense. 

Had  Jewish  messianism  been  the  only  determining  factor  we  might  well 
drop  the  word  Christology  altogether  in  favor  of  messianism.  But  when 
we  come,  for  example,  to  the  Johannine  Christology  we  find  little  messianism. 
Paul  was  the  first  after  Jesus,  so  far  as  we  know,  to  experience  keenly  the 
inadequacy  of  the  messianic  concept.  His  contribution  is  discussed  under 
the  heads:  the  pre-existent  and  incarnate  Lord,  the  crucified  Redeemer, 
the  cosmic  Savior,  the  indwelling  Christ,  and  the  divine  Son  of  God.  An 
advance  upon  the  Pauline  Christology  is  found  in  the  cosmological  Chris- 
tology of  Colossians  and  Ephesians,  which  was  a  further  development  of 
Paulinism,  but  made  larger  use  of  Alexandrian  thought  in  the  conflict  with 
incipient  Gnosticism.  Another  bold  Alexandrian  type  was  that  of  Hebrews, 
which  was  not  so  close  to  Paul  but  was  directly  dependent  on  Philo.  In  the 
Apocalypse  of  John,  Jesus  was  interpreted  by  means  of  the  concepts  of 
apocalyptic,  combined  with  the  universaUsm  of  the  post-apostolic  age  and 
a  comparatively  small  Christian  element.     In  First  Peter  and  First  Clement 

10 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  11 

we  have  edifying  epistles  containing  much  Christology,  but  not  sufficient 
that  is  distinctive  to  warrant  giving  them  a  place  beside  the  great  types 
already  discussed.  The  explicit  emergence  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ's 
saving  mission  to  the  world  of  the  dead  in  First  Peter  is  notable. 

The  Synoptic  Gospels  present  a  double  problem,  but  we  are  at  this  point 
concerned  with  the  Christology  of  the  authors  themselves  and  not  with 
their  sources.  Mark  represents  the  age  just  succeeding  Paul;  lying  in  the 
background  is  a  high  Pauline  Christology.  Luke-Acts  falls  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  second  century  and  moves  in  the  direction  of  the  apologies  of 
the  middle  of  the  century.  Matthew  is  strongly  christological,  representing 
an  advanced  stage  and  moving  toward  CathoHcism. 

The  Johannine  Christology  is  a  further  development  of  Paulinism ;  it  is 
many-sided — mystical,  theological,  betraying  sympathy  with  the  deeper 
currents  of  the  age,  conserving  what  was  most  profound  in  Christianity  and 
at  the  same  time  transforming  it  all  into  the  ripest  christological  product  of 
the  period.  The  Ignatian  Christology,  called  to  expression  by  gnostic  error, 
represents  another  bold,  though  unsystematized  interpretation.  A  Jew 
could  not  bring  himself  to  speak  of  Christ  as  God  in  the  unreserved  manner 
of  this  vigorous  ecclesiastic.  The  originaUty  of  his  thought  may  be  dis- 
cerned by  reading  his  letters  beside  that  of  his  conservative  contemporary 
Polycarp.  The  current  Christology  appears  again  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles, 
affirmed  in  opposition  to  gnostic  error.  A  somewhat  different  and  more 
responsive  type  appears  in  Barnabas. 

About  the  middle  of  the  second  century  there  arose  certain  edifying 
works  not  strongly  christological:  James,  Hermas,  Didache,  Second 
Clement,  Jude,  and  Second  Peter.  In  this  period  the  gnostic  systems  were 
fully  developed  and  the  real  controversy  began.  The  earlier  apologists 
also  were  putting  forth  their  works.  But  the  discussion  of  these  subjects 
would  take  us  beyond  the  New  Testament  period  proper  to  the  age  of  the 
Catholic  church.  It  is  a  singular  and  significant  fact,  however,  that  among 
those  counted  heretics  there  should  have  been  one  who  was  at  least  partly 
gnostic,  who  understood,  as  did  no  contemporary  of  whom  we  know,  the 
gospel  of  the  Christ  who  brings  spiritual  freedom  as  it  was  preached  by  the 
apostle  Paul — Marcion  of  Pontus. 

If  now  we  ask  to  what  extent  the  development  of  christological  thought 
was  in  accord  with  Jesus,  anything  like  an  adequate  answer  would  carry 
us  beyond  the  task  we  have  set  ourselves.  It  may  not  be  amiss,  however, 
to  note  that  although  Paul  had  his  gaze  fixed  on  the  exalted  Lord  and  not  on 
the  earthly  Jesus,  yet  in  certain  respects  he  came  nearer  understanding 
Jesus  than  the  Jewish  Christians  at  Jerusalem,  many  of  whom  had  known 

11 


12  HISTORICAL   AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

Jesus  in  the  flesh.  In  the  death  of  Jesus,  Paul  saw  the  principle  of  self- 
sacrifice  that  animated  his  life.  Paul's  universalism  was  a  logical  develop- 
ment of  the  universalism  impHcit  in  Jesus.  Paul's  doctrine  of  the  freedom 
of  the  Christian  man  was  essentially  one  with  the  ideal  of  ethical  and 
religious  freedom  for  which  Jesus  lived  and  died.  But  it  would  be  a  mistake 
to  overlook  the  fact  that  at  every  point  the  way  of  arriving  at  these  principles 
is  different.  Into  Paul's  thought  there  enter  the  wisdom  of  the  rabbis,  the 
speculation  of  apocalyptic,  and  the  popular  thought- world  of  Hellenism. 
On  the  other  hand,  Jesus  thinks  and  speaks  in  terms  that  are  elementary 
and  universal;  his  religious  ideas  are  simple,  fundamental,  and  mighty. 
Although  Paul's  liberation  of  the  gospel  from  national  barriers  was  in 
accord  with  the  mind  of  Jesus,  Paul  did  not  appeal  for  support  to  Jesus' 
own  attitude  of  freedom ;  indeed,  in  his  view,  Jesus  was  bom  under  law  and 
came  as  a  minister  of  circumcision  for  the  truth  of  God  (Gal.  4:4;  Rom. 
15:8).  The  basis  of  Jesus'  criticism  of  the  law  was  purely  ethical:  the 
law  substituted  appearance  for  reaUty  and  did  not  go  to  the  heart  of  things. 
Paul's  polemic  against  the  law  was  practical  in  motive  also,  but  his  conten- 
tion was  for  redemption  in  Christ.  The  love  of  neighbor  was  broader  in 
the  thought  of  Jesus  than  in  that  of  his  followers;  for  while  they  were  not 
lacking  in  the  comprehensive  Christian  virtue  of  love,  they  dwelt  upon  the 
love  of  brethren  of  the  church.  Where  Paul  departs  most  widely  from 
the  thought  of  Jesus  is  in  the  sphere  of  doctrine  and  not  of  life;  he  stakes 
everything  on  certain  divine  acts  that  entered  into  human  history  but  tran- 
scended it — acts  which  secure  for  men  salvation:  the  incarnation,  death, 
and  resurrection  of  Christ.  Although  Paul  spoke  of  the  obedience  and 
self-sacrifice  of  Jesus  Christ,  he  had  in  mind  the  exempUfication  of  these 
virtues  on  the  part  of  the  Son  of  God  who  came  down  from  heaven  to  save 
men,  rather  than  their  exemplification  in  Jesus  as  he  walked  among  men. 
Yet  the  latter  was  not  absent,  and  had  not  Jesus,  in  Paul's  view,  lived  that 
kind  of  a  fife,  the  ascription  to  him  of  that  character  in  the  larger  con- 
ception would  have  been  an  impossibility. 

Wrede  (Paulus,  S.  88-97;  Eng.  trans.,  pp.  155-69)  protests  vigor- 
ously against  the  statement  that  Paul  understood  Jesus,  and  minimizes 
almost  to  the  extent  of  elimination  all  dependence  of  Paul  on  Jesus.  Closely 
as  they  are  related,  we  must  in  this  connection  distinguish  between  life  and 
dogma,  and  our  study  is  of  dogma.  Had  Wrede  confined  to  the  sphere 
of  doctrine  his  contention  as  to  Paul's  independence,  his  position  would 
have  had  more  to  commend  it. 


12 


OUTLINE    OF   NEW    TESTAMENT    OHRISTOLOGY 


13 


CHARTS  —  CHRONOLOGICAL  AND   GENETIC 
CHART  I 

Chronological  Exhibit  of  Types  of  Christology  within  the 
New  Testament  Period 


A.D. 

30-  40 
40-  SO 
50-  60 
60-  70 

70-  80 
80-  90 
90-100 


120-130 

130-140 


140-150 


150-160 


Hebrew  Prophetism 
Jewish  Messianism 
The  Messianism  of  Jesus 
Jewish-Christian  Christology 

Pauline  Christology 

(Sources  of  Synoptic  Gospels) 

Mark 
CosMOLOGiCAL  Christology  (Col.  and  Eph.) 
Christology  of  Hebrews 

I  Peter 

I  Clement 

Apocalyptical  Christology  (The  Apocalypse  of  John) 

Luke-Acts 
Matthaean  Christology 

Pastoral  Epistles 
Johannine  Christology 
Ignatian  Christology 

Polycarp 

Apocalypse  of  Peter 

Gospel  of  Peter 

Barnabas 

(Marcion) 

Jude 

James 

Hennas  Gnostics 

Didache  Apologists 

II  Clement 
II  Peter 


13 


14 


HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 


CHART  II 

Showing  Genetic  Relationships  within  the  Christology  of  the 
New  Testament  Period 

JJIebrew  Prophgtism 
Babylonian-Persia 
Religion 


30 

40 

SO 
60 
70 
80 
90 


Gentile 
ThS  Messianism  and  Personality  of  Jesus  ^Needs  and 


130 

140 
>So 

t6o 


Apocalyptical 

Christology 

of  Apoc.  of  John 


II  Pefer 


IcNATL\N  Christology. 
Gospel  o* 
Peter 
James 
Hermas 
Didache 
II  Clement 


Marcion 


Apologists 


14 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    OHBISTOLOGY 


15 


CD 

H 

w 
> 
w 

Q 

< 

W 
Pi 

H 
Pi 

a  w 
u  w 

pq 
H 

< 
U 
I— I 

O 

o 

o 
:?; 
o 

Pi 
K 
u 


H 
w 

XI 

c 

i 

s 

Tiberius,  14-37 

Caiaphas  High  Priest  18-36 

Pontius  Pilate  Procurator  26- 

Death  of  Jesus  ca.  30 
Conversion  of  Paul  ca.  30-32 
Caius  Caesar  (Caligula)  37-41 

1 

M 

Appointment  of  Felix  ca.  50, 

51.  52 
Nero  54-68 
Recall   of   Felix   55-56?    57- 

59? 
Festus  Procurator  55-56  ?  57- 

59? 

Burning  of  Rome  and  perse- 
cution by  Nero  64 
Jewish  War  66-73 
Galba,  Otho,  Vitellius  68-69 
Vespasian  69-79 

0 

"(5 

■3 

1—, 
"o 

It 

^2 

OH 

Mark  ca.  70 
Hebrews  70-96 
Barnabas  70-131 

1 

(2 

NO 

"3 
a 

Mark? 

I  Peter,  Barnabas,  Heb.  75- 
100 

a 

K 

On 
00" 

-a 
h 
1— 1 
1— 1 

i 

I  Cor.  (Gal.  ?),  II  Cor.  53 
(52) 

Rom.  53,  54  (52,  53) 

Col.,  Philemon,  Eph.   (wenn 
er  echt  ist),    Phil.    57-59 
(56-58) 

Genuine  portions  of  the  Pas- 
toral Epistles  59-64 

Mark  (probably)  65-70 
Gospel  according  to  the  He- 
brews 65  (7o)-ioo 

Matthew  (excepting  some 

later  additions)  70-75 
Luke-Acts  ca.  ^?>-g^, 

Q 
■< 

d 
'I- 

d 
to 

d 

NO 

0 

00 

i 

15 


16 


HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 


OC 

„ 

r 

oK 

f> 

5 

c 

^h 


I 
in 

H 

W 
> 

w 

Q 

< 

H 

< 
Pi 
W 

h 


fa 
o 

w 

PQ 
< 

< 
u 

I— I 

o 
o 

hJ 
o 

o 

K 

u 


i2       i 

U         00 

"^  o  c 

o  0-5  o 

^  I  ^  o 


i:  s  X  lu 

S  l-H  <  H-, 


O   cij 


-^  ="  ^"^ 
^P^  ^c  ::^ 

E  ^  rj  H- >  ov^ 

^^1^  ^     p 


-^  ^  -2    . 
d  «  rt  y 

PL<W  < 


«  ^      M 


o  £  o 

J3     H 


*->        ~  en 


o-  ,«; 


^-o  3^°  5-  jif^p; 


60 


"O     I 


-r  HH   O     H 


>>-Q 

HH     M     ^ 

'%^  c .« 

1 

-J3    ^^ 

t;  t? 

g  o< 

tn  ,^  Ir^         (U 

.22  .2  C    I         oi 
P-.5  -g  S  u  ■" 


O  tS 


<J    O 


4J    nJ   <~0 


H->P-, 


16 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY 


17 


O     M 

"      1 

PQ 

c  '-' 

a 

C        ot 

T3 

O  "^  00 

fO   M 

0 

■*-'    c/3    ro 

a 

>>"C     M 

t/i 

d-ci    1 

o 

K 

"^  rt  2 

••a 

E 

o  c  c 

CJ    M    I-" 

■1-'  <Li  -a 
i3  "  =2 

H^           W 

►^    <; 

a 

c> 

U 

in 

H 

iz; 

o 

w 

> 

"a 

o 

o 

o 

0 

00 

a 

M 

01 

lo 

P 

W 

1 

M 

T 

i 

:^ 

J^ 

c 

lO 
fO 

10 

< 

ni 

s 

in 

1— 1 

"Sh 

a 
Ph 

Ph 
1— 1 

<: 

^ 

<5 
CM 

0 

T 

10 

*H          >-■      0 

a    a  to 

1— 1 

(N 

VJ       i*-.     H 

H-1 

" 

nj 

o 

S" 

f^  "  S  ^ 

w 

pq 

:3 

H 

3     „ 

< 

03    o 

«*H  73  CLi   i> 

h 

-a  s 

0   c"o  Ph 

1-4 

S 

&-^ 

(— 1 

o 

^ 

HI 

6     ^ 
t:  0  u 

10  >^               vA 

o 

O 

[O   6              H     t«     H 
^^  M              6    -^     IT) 

O     .        "  2  " 

H     D  -— -  3            -j-l 

1-1 

-a       o 
c         "^ 

ci 

0    "^Cb 

o 

o 

Pi 

u 

a 

TO      M      -^ 
U     fc-i     ^ 

'^   a  In 

"S  a  "0 
ij  ^  -  ^^ 

0    cj   '-' 

O    p^ 

«    M  uT  '^ 

«::-.l^s 

tn    H    O 

c  oj  0  ,!!.  " 

'~'  cd  aj   0  ? 

^ofcsg 

<u  <j  ►-I    „—   •- 
P    O    "  i2    O    tn 

<2    tn    3    -+  "^ 

«  «  "  s  s 

s  s  -5  Dj  U  f^ 

3    3        1— 1  1— 1 

w    o 

pqp< 

ffi         Q         Ph 

d 

6 

0 

6 

0 

d 

M 

rO 

■+ 

u-> 

vO 

tH 

< 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

M 

ro 

■=f 

LO 

M 

H 

M 

H 

H 

17 


18  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

Hamack's  chronology  of  the  ApostoHc  Age  given  in  the  first  column 
does  not  represent  the  judgment  of  the  majority  of  scholars.  The  crucial 
point  is  the  date  of  the  accession  of  Festus  as  procurator  of  Judea  to  succeed 
Felix,  the  removal  of  Paul  the  prisoner  from  Caesarea  to  Rome  having  fol- 
lowed shortly  after  the  arrival  of  Festus  (Acts  25:1,  6, 13,  23;  27:1).  The 
question  is  as  to  whether  Josephus,  Tacitus,  or  Eusebius  is  to  be  followed. 
The  dates  for  the  recall  of  Felix  and  the  accession  of  Festus  gathered  from 
the  works  of  these  historians  are  as  follows: 

Josephus — 57-61,  probably  60. 
Tacitus — 55 

Eusebius — 55-56,  according  to  Jerome's  version  of  Eusebius'  Chronicle; 
54,  according  to  the  Armenian  version  of  Eusebius'  Chronicle. 

(See  Votaw,  "Recent  Discussion  of  the  Chronology  of  the  Apostolic  Age," 
Biblical  World  (1898),  Vol.  XI,  pp.  11 2-19,  177-87-) 

The  more  common  dates  for  the  Pauline  letters,  after  Josephus,  are 
about  as  follows: 

I  Thess 52      Rom 58 

II  Thess 53      Phile.,  Col,  and  Eph 62 

Gal 54      Phil 63 

I  and  II  Cor 57      Pastoral  Epistles 65-67 

SELECTED    BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Introduction 

Siegfried,  Carl.     Philo  von  Alexandria.     1875. 

Drummond,   James.    Philo-Judaeus,  or  the  Jewish- Alexandrian  Philosophy  in 

Its  Development  and  Completion.     1888. 
LiGHTFOOT,  J.  B.     The  Apostolic  Fathers.     Part  I,  1890;  Part  II,  1885. 
Charles,  R.  H.     The  Book  of  Enoch.    1893.     The  Assumption  of  Moses.    1897. 

The  Book  oj  Jubilees.  1902.     The  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs.  1908. 
Harnack,  Adolf.     Die  Chronologic  der  altchristlichen  Litteratur  bis  Eusebius. 

1897.  Sprilche  und  Reden  Jesu.  1907.  Eng.  trans..  The  Sayings  oj  Jesus. 
1908.  Die  Apostelgeschichte.  1908.  Eng.  trans.,  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 
1909. 

McGiFFERT,  Arthur  C.     A  History  of  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age.     1897. 
KRtJGER,    GusTAV.     Geschichte   der  altchristlichen  Litteratur.     Zweite  Auflage. 

1898.  Eng.  trans.,  History  of  Early  Christian  Literature.     1897. 
Hastings,  J.\mes.    Dictionary  of  the  Bible.     1898-1904. 

Kautzsch,   E.     Die  Apokryphen  und  Pseudepigraphen  des  Alten  Testaments'. 

1898-99. 
Cheyne  and  Black.     Encyclopedia  Biblica.     1899-1903. 

18 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  19 

Gebhardt,  Harnack,  and  Zahn.    Patrum  Apostolicorum  Opera.     1900. 

MoFFATT,  James.     The  Historical  New  Testament.     1901. 

Singer,  Is.adore.     Jewish  Encyclopedia.     190 1. 

Weizsacker,  Carl.     Das  apostolische  Zeitalter  der  christlichen  Kirche.     Dritte 

Auflage.    1901.     Eng.  trans.,  The  Apostolic  Age  0}  the  Christian  Church. 

1894-95. 
Burton,  E.  D.     Principles  of  Literary  Criticism  and  the  Synoptic  Problem.  1904. 
Wernle,  Paul.     Die  Quellen  des  Lebens  Jesu.  1904.      Eng.  trans.,  The  Sources 

of  Our  Knowledge  of  Jesus.     1907. 
Knopf,  Rudolf.     Das  nachapostolische  Zeitalter:    Geschichte  der  christlichen 

Gemeinden  vom  Beginn  der  Flavierdynastie  bis  zum  Ende  Hadrians.     1905. 
SoDEN,  Hermann  von.     Urchristliche  Litteratur geschichte.    1905.     Eng.  trans., 

The  History   of  Early  Christian  Literature:    The  Writings  of  the  New 

Testament.     1906. 
Wellhausen,  J.     Einleitung  in  die  drei  ersten  Evangelien.     1905. 
BuRKiTT,  Francis  C.     The  Gospel  History  and  Its  Transmission.     1906. 
Holtzmann,  OsKAR.     NeutestamentHche  Zeitgeschichte.     Zweite  Auflage.     1906. 
JtJLiCHER,  Adolf.     Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament.     Fiinfte   und  sechste, 

neu  bearbeitete  Auflage.    1906.     Eng.  trans.,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment.    1904. 
Schmiedel,  Paul  W.     Das  vierte  Evangelium  gegeniiber  den  drei  ersten.     1906. 

Evangelium,  Briefe  und  Offenbarung  des  Johannes.     1906.     Eng.  trans,  of 

both  in  one  vol..  The  Johannine  Writings.     1908. 
Allen,  Willoughby  C.     Commentary  on  St.  Matthew   (International   Critical 

Commentary).     1907. 
ScHtJRER,   Emil.     Geschichte  des  jiidischen   Volkes  im  Zeitalter  Jesu  Christi. 

Dritte  und  vierte  Auflage.     1901,  1907.     Eng.  trans.,  A  History  of  the  Jewish 

People  in  the  Time  of  Jesus  Christ.     189 1. 
GooDSPEED,  E.  J.     The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  {Bible  for  Home  and  School). 

1908. 
Weiss,   Johannes    (editor).      Die  Schriften  des   Neuen   Testaments.     Zweite 

Auflage.     1908. 

Theology 
Spitta,  Friedrich.     Christi  Predigt  an  die  Geister.     1890. 
Harnack,   Adolf.     Dogmengeschichie.      Dritte   Auflage.     1894.     Eng.  trans.. 

History  of   Dogma.     1894.     Das   Wesen   des   Christentums.     1901.     Eng. 

trans..   What  is  Christianity?     1901. 
Holtzmann,  Heinrich  J.     Lehrbuch  der  neutestamentlichen  Theologie.      1897. 

Das  messianische  Bewusstsein  Jesu.     1907. 
Hort,  F.  J.  A.     The  First  Epistle  of  St.  Peter:  1:1—2:17.     The  Greek  Text 

with  Introductorj'  Lecture,  Commentary,  and  Additional  Notes.     1898. 
Cone,  O.     Paul:   the  Man,  the  Missionary,  and  the  Teacher.     1898. 
Stevens,  George  B.     The  Theology  of  the  New  Testament.     1899. 

19 


20  HISTORICAL   AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

Clemen,  Carl.    Niedergefahren  zu  den  Tolen.     1900.    Die  Entwicklung  der 

christlichen  Religion  innerhalb  des  Neuen  Testaments.     1908.     Religionge- 

schichtliche  Erkldrung  des  Neuen  Testaments.     1909. 
MoNNiER,  Jean.     La  premihe  epitre  de  I'apdtre  Pierre.     1900. 
HoLTZMANN,  OsKAR.     Leben  Jesu.     1901.     Eng.  trans.,  Life  0}  Jesus.     1904. 
Pfleiderer,  Otto.    Das  Urchristentum:  seine  Sckriften  und  Lehren  in  geschicht- 

licJiem  Zusammenhang.     Zweite  Auflage.     1902.     Eng.  trans,  of  Band  I, 

Primitive  Christianity,  two  vols.     1906,  1909. 
Neumann,  Arno.    Jesus,  wer  er  geschichtlich  war.     1904.    Eng.  trans.,  Jesus. 

1906. 
R£ville,  Albert.     Histoire  du  dogme  de  la  divinite  de  Jesus-Christ.     3""*  ed. 

1904.     Eng.  trans..  History  of  the  Dogma  of  the  Deity  of  Jesus  Christ.     1905. 
Weinel,  H.     Paulus:  der  Mensch  und  sein  Werk.     1904.     Eng.  trans.,  St.  Paul, 

the  Man  and  His  Work.     1906. 
Wernle,  Paul.     Die  Anfdnge  unserer  Religion.     Zweite  Auflage.     1904.     Eng. 

trans..  The  Beginnings  of  Christianity.     1903. 
Bailey,  John  W.     Does  Hellenism  Contribute  Constituent  Elements  to  Paul's 

Christ  ology  ?     1 905 . 
Gressmann,  Hugo.    Der  Ursprung  der  israelitisch-jiidischen  Eschatologie.    1905. 
Mathews,  Shailer.     The  Messianic  Hope  in  the  New  Testament.     1905. 
Pfleiderer,  Otto.     The  Early  Christian  Conception  of  Christ:  Its  Significance 

and  Value  in  the  History  of  Religion.     1905. 
Porter,   Frank   C.     The  Messages  of  the  Apocalyptical  Writers.     1905. 
BoussET,  Wilhelm.     Die  Religion  des  Judentums  im  neutestamentlichen  Zeitalter. 

Zweite  Auflage.     1906.     Jesus.     1906.     Eng.  trans.,  Jesus.     1906. 
Schweitzer,  Albert.     Von  Reimarus  zu  Wrede:    eine  Geschichte  der  Lehen- 

Jesu-Forschung.     1906. 
Scott,  Ernest  F.     The  Fourth  Gospel;  Its  Purpose  and  Theology.     1906.     The 

Apologetic  of  the  New  Testament.     1907. 
Sand  AY,  William.     The  Life  of  Christ  in  Recent  Research.     1907. 
Wrede,  William.     Paulus.     Zweite  Auflage.     1907.     Eng.  trans.,  Paul.     1907. 
Causse,  a.     Devolution  de  I'espSrance  messianique  dans  le  christianisme  primitif. 

1908. 
Denney,  James.    Jesus  and  the  Gospel.     1909. 
Sharman,  Henry  B.     The  Teaching  of  Jesus  about  the  Future,  according  to  the 

Synoptic  Gospels.     1909. 
Weiss,  Johannes.     Christus:  die  Anfdnge  des  Dogmas.     1909. 

In  so  large  a  field  an  exhaustive  bibliography  would  be  impracticable 
and  would  probably  not  be  especially  useful;  hence  only  a  selection  of  the 
more  important  books  is  given.  Other  good  books  that  have  made  no 
special  contribution  to  this  study  are  omitted.  Periodical  literature  is  not 
given  in  the  list,  but  articles  are  referred  to  in  the  proper  places. 

Mention  should  be  made  of  some  of  the  books  that  have  been  of  greatest 

20 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    OHRISTOLOGY  21 

service.  Both  for  introduction  and  for  theology  McGiflFert's  admirable 
Apostolic  Age  has  been  extensively  used.  Stevens'  Theology  of  the  New 
Testament  is  the  best  that  has  yet  appeared  in  English,  and  the  following 
treatment  is  largely  indebted  to  it.  Pfleiderer's  Urchristentum  is  a  work  of 
remarkable  insight  on  the  theological  side,  and  has  been  found  especially 
useful  in  the  patristic  field.  Unfortunately  it  is  at  present  but  half  acces- 
sible to  those  who  read  only  English.  Wemle's  Beginnings  of  Christianity 
is  vigorous  and  stimulating.  Christus,  by  Johannes  Weiss,  is  brief  but 
valuable.  E.  F.  Scott's  Fourth  Gospel  and  Apologetic  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment are  masterly,  and  have  been  used  to  great  advantage.  Hamack's 
Chronologie  is  a  monumental  work  and  an  indispensable  storehouse  of 
information.     Lightfoot  has  been  of  service  on  the  Apostolic  Fathers. 

However,  even  in  the  case  of  books  that  have  been  found  most  helpful, 
many  of  their  conclusions  are  rejected  in  the  following  pages. 


21 


I.    JEWISH  MESSIANISM 

Were  the  subject  of  our  study  the  personality  of  Jesus,  we  should  begin 
with  Israelitish  prophetism  instead  of  Jewish  messianism,  for  Jesus  felt 
himself  akin  to  the  old  prophets,  and  his  prophetic  vocation  and  conscious- 
ness precede  and  determine  his  relation  to  current  messianism.  But  the 
beginnings  of  the  christological  world-drama  which  has  played  a  large 
part  in  the  world's  reUgious  life  for  more  than  eighteen  hundred  years  are 
to  be  found  rather  in  the  new  world  of  apocalyjDtic  Judaism  which  succeeded 
the  age  of  the  great  Hebrew  prophets. 

Early  in  Israel's  history,  when  the  people  thought  of  their  God  as  "a 
man  of  war"  (Exod.  15:2)  whose  interests  were  one  with  his  people's,  and 
who  fought  their  battles  with  them  (Num.  10:35),  the  popular  hope  was 
directed  toward  the  day  of  Yahweh,  when  God  himself  would  come  and 
destroy  the  enemies  of  Israel  and  estabhsh  his  people  in  peace  and  pros- 
perity. The  prophets  of  the  eighth  and  succeeding  centuries  used  and 
transformed  the  popular  eschatology  in  the  direction  of  higher,  more 
ethical  conceptions  of  God.  For  them  Yahweh  was  no  longer  a  god  among 
other  gods,  and  his  interests  were  not  bound  up  with  Israel  and  its  fate. 
They  too  looked  for  a  day  of  Yahweh  which  would  inaugurate  a  new 
epoch  and  mean  for  the  enemies  of  Yahweh  vengeance,  for  all  the  wicked 
punishment,  for  Israel  sifting,  and  for  the  righteous  deliverance;  and  this 
crisis  would  come  through  God's  initiative. 

The  glorious  reigns  of  David  and  Solomon  left  a  profound  impression 
on  the  popular  mind,  and  the  nation  hoped  for  a  restoration  of  the  Davidic 
glory.  The  hope  at  first  had  reference  not  to  an  individual  Messiah  but 
to  theocratic  kings  of  the  house  of  David,  and  the  promise  of  a  king  of  his 
house  forever  meant  a  continuation  of  the  Davidic  dynasty.  But  the 
thought  passed  to  that  of  a  personal  Messiah,  another  warrior-king, 
endowed  by  God  with  special  gifts  and  powers.  This  popular,  political 
conception  persisted  far  into  the  Christian  era.  It  was  a  powerful  factor 
in  the  revolts  against  Rome.  The  tumults  of  the  years  44-66  A.  D.  bear 
witness  to  the  feverish  state  of  the  public  mind.  We  meet  with  the  idea 
again  and  again  in  the  gospels.  Any  poUtical  revolutionist  possessing 
qualities  of  leadership  might  be  enthusiastically  received  as  the  Messiah. 
Up  to  the  time  of  the  Bar-Cochba  rising  men  looked  for  the  coming  of  an 
earthly  Messiah. 

But  in  contact  with  foreign  Ufe  there  grew  up  among  the  Jewish  people 
a  developed  belief  in  an  organized  kingdom  of  demon-powers  on  the  one 
22]  22 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  23 

hand,  and  of  angels  and  heavenly  armies  on  the  other,  and  the  result  was 
that  the  messianic  hope  became  transcendental  in  character.  In  much  of 
the  Jewish  post-exilic  literature  elements  of  the  messianic  hope  appear  only 
here  and  there,  but  with  the  Maccabean  uprising  the  hope  revived,  and  from 
that  time  became  part  of  Jewish  patriotism,  bursting  forth  passionately  in 
the  Psakns  of  the  Pharisees  and  finding  more  transcendental  expression  in 
other  apocalyptic  Hterature. 

In  the  first  great  apocalypse,  the  Book  of  Daniel  (167-165  B.  c),  it  is 
God  himself  who  is  to  overthrow  Antiochus  and  right  the  wrongs  of  his 
people.  But  there  appears  also  the  figure  of  an  angel,  one  like  a  man,  in 
the  famous  passage:  "I  saw  in  the  night-visions,  and  behold,  there  came 
with  the  clouds  of  heaven  one  like  unto  a  Son  of  man,  and  he  came  even 
to  the  Ancient  of  Days,  and  they  brought  him  near  before  him.  And 
there  was  given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that  all  the 
peoples,  nations,  and  languages  should  serve  him;  his  dominion  is  an 
everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  pass  away,  and  his  kingdom  that 
which  shall  not  be  destroyed"  (7:13,  14). 

In  the  17th  Psalm  of  the  Pharisees  the  Messiah  is  most  strikingly 
portrayed.  He  is  Israel's  king,  the  son  of  David,  who  will  break  in  pieces 
them  that  rule  unjustly,  purge  Jerusalem  from  them  that  trample  her 
down,  thrust  out  the  sinners  from  the  inheritance  and  utterly  destroy  their 
proud  spirit;  but  he  shall  also  gather  together  a  holy  people  whom  he 
shall  lead  in  righteousness,  and  suffer  no  iniquity  to  lodge  in  their  midst, 
for  he  shall  take  knowledge  of  them,  that  they  be  all  the  sons  of  their  God. 
He  is  a  righteous  king  and  taught  of  God.  He  shall  not  put  his  trust  in 
horse  and  rider  and  bow,  for  his  hope  is  in  God.  He  himself  also  is  pure 
from  sin,  so  that  he  may  rule  a  mighty  people.  He  leans  upon  God,  and 
God  shall  cause  him  to  be  mighty  through  the  spirit  of  holiness.  The 
psakns  in  the  first  and  second  chapters  of  Luke  breathe  the  same  spirit; 
there  is  the  same  union  of  political  elements  with  the  ethical  and  religious 
elements  in  the  national  hope. 

Advanced  apocalyptic  presents  a  more  transcendental  Messiah.  In 
the  Book  of  Enoch  the  figure  of  Dan.  7:13,  probably  symbolic,  is  trans- 
formed into  a  half-divine  companion  of  God  and  angels,  who  was  created 
before  heaven  and  earth  and  will  sit  on  God's  throne  in  the  coming  age  to 
judge  men  and  angels.  A  chief  mission  of  the  Messiah  in  the  Psalms  of 
the  Pharisees,  64-40  B.  c,  was  to  make  the  Jewish  people  pure  and  right- 
eous, but  in  Enoch  the  Messiah  comes  to  make  righteous  Israel  triumphant.' 
According  to  Charles  {The  Book  of  Enoch,  p.  41),  "the  influence  of  Enoch 
I  Cf .  Porter,  The  Messages  of  the  A  pocalyptical  Writers,  p.  3  29. 

23 


24  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

on  the  New  Testament  has  been  greater  than  that  of  all  the  other  apocryphal 
and  pseudepigraphical  books  taken  together." 

In  Enoch  90:37,  38,  written  according  to  Charles  in  the  period  166- 
i6i  B.  c,  from  the  same  general  standpoint  as  Daniel,  the  Messiah  is 
grotesquely  symbolized  as  a  white  bull  with  large  horns,  and  the  people 
who  make  petition  to  him  are  beasts  and  birds,  afterward  transformed  into 
white  oxen.  This  Messiah  is  born  after  the  kingdom  has  been  established 
by  God,  and  he  becomes  head  of  the  messianic  community.  The  passage 
appears  to  have  exercised  no  influence  upon  the  New  Testament. 

But  not  so  the  Messiah  of  the  SimiUtudes  (Enoch,  chaps.  37-70). 
Charles  gives  the  date  94-79  b.  c.  or  70-64  b.  c.  Porter  places  the  passage 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Herod  the  Great.  In  this  section  the 
Messiah  occupies  the  central  place.  The  kings  of  the  earth  and  the  strong 
who  possess  the  earth  will  be  afflicted  and  fall,  "for  they  have  denied  the 
Lord  of  spirits  and  his  Anointed"  (48:8-10).  At  the  final  judgment  the 
Righteous  One  shall  appear  before  the  eyes  of  the  elect  righteous  (38:  i,  2). 
In  53:6  he  is  called  "the  Righteous  and  Elect  One,"  and  in  many  other 
passages  "the  Elect  One."  But  most  characteristic  is  the  title  "Son  of 
man,"  found  here  as  a  definite  title  for  the  first  time  in  Jewish  literature. 
The  oppression  of  the  kings  and  mighty  ones  will  not  long  continue,  for 
the  Head  of  Days  will  suddenly  appear,  and  with  him  another  being  whose 
countenance  has  the  appearance  of  a  man  and  whose  face  is  full  of  gracious- 
ness,  like  one  of  the  holy  angels — the  Son  of  man.  He  has  righteousness 
in  an  extraordinary  degree,  will  grind  to  powder  the  teeth  of  the  sinners 
and  put  down  kings  from  their  thrones  because  they  do  not  extol  and 
praise  him  (46:1-5).  In  him  dwells  the  spirit  of  wisdom  and  the  spirit 
of  him  who  gives  knowledge  (49:3).  He  rules  over  all  (62:6).  He  is  the 
revealer  of  all  things  (46:3).  "And  from  henceforth  there  vrill  be  nothing 
that  is  corruptible ;  for  the  Son  of  man  has  appeared  and  sits  on  the  throne 
of  his  glory,  and  all  evil  will  pass  away  before  his  face  and  depart;  but  the 
word  of  the  Son  of  man  will  be  strong  before  the  Lord  of  Spirits"  (69:29). 
Men  and  angels  will  be  judged  before  him,  and  the  word  of  his  mouth  will 
slay  all  the  sinners  (62:2).  "He  will  be  a  staff  to  the  righteous  on  which 
they  will  support  themselves  and  not  fall,  and  he  will  be  the  light  of  the 
gentiles  and  the  hope  of  those  who  are  troubled  of  heart"  (48:4).  He 
is  to  be  their  companion  forever  (62:14).  His  pre-existence  is  plainly 
taught  :  "  For  this  reason  has  he  been  chosen  and  hidden  before  him  before 
the  creation  of  the  world  and  for  evermore.  And  the  wisdom  of  the  Lord 
of  Spirits  has  revealed  him  to  the  holy  and  righteous,  for  he  preserveth  the 
lot  of  the  righteous,  because  they  have  hated  and  despised  this  world  of 

24 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  25 

unrighteousness,  and  have  hated  all  its  works  and  ways  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  of  Spirits:  for  they  are  saved  in  his  name  and  he  is  the  avenger 
of  their  life"  (48:6,  7). 

In  the  Jewish  Sibylline  Oracles,  an  Alexandrian  production  the  oldest 
portion  of  which  was  written  ca.  140  b.  c,  the  messianic  element  is  strong: 
God  will  send  a  king  to  bring  peace  upon  the  earth  by  destroying  God's 
enemies  and  fulfilling  the  promises  to  his  children;  then  will  be  established 
a  universal  kingdom  with  Jerusalem  as  its  theocratic  center.  In  the 
description  of  the  approach  of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the  Assumption  of 
Moses,  of  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era,  there  is  no  mention  of 
the  messianic  king,  and  again  he  does  not  appear  in  the  joyous  days  to  come 
after  Israel's  repentance  in  the  Book  of  Jubilees.  In  his  description  of  the 
messianic  age  Philo  appears  to  include  the  messianic  king  (De  Praemiis 
et  Poenis  16).  The  Apocalypses  of  Baruch  and  Ezra  witness  to  the  per- 
sistence of  the  hope  after  the  destruction  of  the  holy  city  and  temple. 
In  the  Apocalypse  of  Ezra,  written  90-100  A.  D.,  the  Messiah  introduces 
and  rules  over  the  millennial  earthly  kingdom,  but  God  himself  will  be  the 
final  judge  (chap.  7).  The  Messiah  is  pre-existent — "kept  unto  the  end" 
(12:32),  "kept  a  great  season"  (13:26). 

The  dominant  note  of  the  reUgious  life  of  Judaism  in  the  period  we 
have  been  studying  was  the  conviction  that  God  had  given  his  people  a 
law,  and  the  one  work  of  the  pious  Jew  was  the  observance  of  that  law. 
But  the  rewards  of  such  observance  were  in  the  future,  and  the  hope  of  a 
better  future  was  ever  the  faith-element  in  the  rehgious  consciousness  of 
Israel.  This  hope  assumed  different  forms.  Alongside  of  belief  in  an 
earthly,  Davidic  Messiah  there  entered  the  idea  of  a  heavenly  world-ruler 
and  representative  of  God,  who  sits  on  the  throne  of  glory  and  holds  judg- 
ment over  sinners.  In  general  it  may  be  said  that  the  Messiah  was  earthly 
and  the  Son  of  man  heavenly.  The  Son  of  man  might  be  called  the  Messiah, 
but  he  could  not  be  the  Son  of  David;  that  is  to  say,  a  descendant  of  David 
would  hardly  be  described  as  an  angelic  being.  For  the  Son  of  man  was 
superhuman,  and  as  everything  valuable  was  supposed  to  have  previously 
existed  in  heaven,  he  was  a  pre-existent  being  (Enoch  46:1-3;  48:3,  6; 
49:2-4;  62:7).  There  was  therefore  nothing  fixed  in  the  conception 
of  the  Messiah.  The  significant  fact  is  that  before  Jesus  came  the  materials 
for  a  Christology  were  already  present  in  the  messianic  hopes  and  con- 
ceptions of  his  countrymen,  and  when  he  gained  world-significance  and 
the  Jewish  concepts  proved  inadequate  to  express  what  men  experienced 
in  him,  new  materials  were  at  hand  in  the  gentile  world;  hence  the  rapid 
development  of  a  rich  Christology. 

25 


II.     THE  MESSIANISM  OF  JESUS 

In  the  present  state  of  gospel-criticism  it  is  not  possible  to  set  forth 
with  precision  the  attitude  of  Jesus  toward  the  current  messianism.  We 
have  ample  means  of  judging  what  impression  he  made  upon  others,  but 
before  we  can  arrive  with  historical  assurance  at  Jesus'  own  thought,  the 
documentary  sources  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  and  the  mutual  relationships 
of  these  sources  must  be  more  conclusively  determined  and  evaluated.  It 
now  appears  that  there  are  more  than  two  relatively  independent  and 
quite  different  sources.  One  of  them,  which  is  essentially  our  Gospel 
of  Mark,  is  probably  not  without  Pauline  influence,  and  is  in  general  so 
largely  a  developed  expression  of  the  faith  of  primitive  Christians  as  to 
demand  critical  treatment;  it  has  also  been  influenced  textually  by  Matthew 
and  Luke.  It  is  interpretation  as  well  as  narrative,  opening  with  the 
words,  possibly  a  title:  "Beginning  of  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ."  In 
its  present  form  it  was  written  after  70  A.  D.  The  remaining  material 
common  to  Matthew  and  Luke,  consisting  mainly  of  discourses  and 
sayings  of  Jesus,  has  been  generally  referred  to  a  single,  homogeneous 
source,  and  this  error  has  to  some  extent  \itiated  a  vast  amount  of  other- 
wise valuable  criticism.  The  sayings  and  discourses  of  Jesus  that  find 
their  way  into  Matthew  and  Luke  were  probably  gathered  into  groups 
in  Aramaic  in  Palestine  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Intended 
for  the  Christian  community,  they  are  not  directly  affected  by  apologetic 
interests. 

The  impression  made  by  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  critically  considered, 
is  that  during  the  first  part  of  his  ministry,  although  possessed  of  an  intimate 
knowledge  of  God  and  conscious  of  being  intrusted  with  a  great  mission 
and  endowed  with  divine  power,  Jesus  did  not  lay  claim  to  messiahship; 
at  Caesarea  Philippi  he  accepted  the  confession  of  his  disciples  to  his 
messiahship,  and  from  that  time  he  called  himself  the  Son  of  man  and 
proclaimed  the  parousia.  In  the  discourse-sources  messiahship  is  assumed 
throughout;  it  comes  to  more  definite  expression  in  the  Temptation  and 
in  Matt.  11 :  25-27  (Luke  10:21,  22),  and  in  connection  with  the  announce- 
ment of  the  parousia  toward  the  close  he  puts  forth  the  claim  that  he  will 
come  as  king  and  judge.  In  many  instances  in  these  discourses  and 
sayings  the  personality  of  Jesus  stands  out  prominently.  It  is  clear, 
accordingly,  that  our  sources  bear  emphatic  witness  to  messiahship  as  an 
element  in  the  self-consciousness  of  Jesus,  but  it  is  equally  evident  that  they 
26]  26 


Of 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHEISTOLOGY  27 

tend  to  throw  into  the  forefront  of  his  message  the  ethical  and  religious 
element,  and  remove  to  the  background  of  his  thought  or  eUminate  alto- 
gether much  of  the  eschatological  coloring  of  the  gospels  as  they  now  stand. 
Certainly  the  eschatological  terminology  and  views  of  the  age  appear  in 
these  sources,  and  it  is  not  always  easy  to  determine  to  what  extent  Jesus 
shared  in  such  conceptions,  but  the  emphasis  upon  his  prophetic  vocation 
is  unmistakable. 

It  would  appear,  then,  that  in  the  mind  of  Jesus  his  prophetic  character 
was  of  primary  significance.  From  the  time  of  the  Baptism  he  was  con- 
scious of  a  special  mission;  he  had  seen  a  vision  of  God,  the  heavenly 
Father,  and  his  whole  nature,  emotional,  reflective,  and  volitional,  was 
powerfully  stirred.  His  conception  of  his  special  mission  is  best  expressed 
in  the  text  at  Nazareth  (Luke  4:18,  19).  He  believed  himself  to  be  a 
teacher,  a  reformer,  a  prophet — and  more  than  a  prophet,  the  final  mes- 
senger of  God  to  men.  Under  these  circumstances  it  was  inevitable  that 
he  face  the  question  of  messiahship.  It  was  in  the  air.  With  a  mission 
distinct  from  that  of  the  Baptist,  a  full  knowledge  of  the  Father,  a  work  for 
the  kingdom  not  only  preparatory,  but  actually  initiating  the  new  age, 
he  could  not  but  accept  the  thought  of  messiahship.  The  incident  at 
Caesarea  Philippi,  the  reply  to  the  question  of  the  Baptist,  the  entry  into 
Jerusalem,  the  confession  at  the  trial,  and  above  all  the  unanimous  con- 
viction of  the  disciples,  it  would  seem,  immediately  after  the  resurrection, 
leave  little  room  for  doubt  that  Jesus  believed  that  he  was  the  Messiah. 
The  prophetic  consciousness  related  to  what  he  was,  the  messianic  to 
what  he  was  to  become,  if  indeed  such  a  distinction  is  permissible. 

It  is  clear,  however,  that  he  advanced  the  claim  with  great  reserve. 
Neither  the  popular  terrestrial  and  political  nor  the  literary  supra-mundane 
conceptions  of  the  Messiah  fitted  in  exactly  with  his  inner  convictions. 
The  political  role  he  rejected  outright.  The  eschatological  he  appears  to 
have  accepted  in  part.  Unless  it  be  involved  in  the  thought  of  messiahship 
and  in  the  use  of  the  title  Son  of  man,  there  is  no  trace  of  any  consciousness 
of  pre-existence.  If  in  his  last  hours,  when  his  work  was  cut  short  by  the 
forces  of  opposition  to  God's  kingdom,  he  spoke  of  returning  in  glory,  as 
seems  to  have  been  the  case,  it  was  a  messianic  expression  of  his  faith  that 
God's  cause  must  finally  triuitiph  and  his  own  work  receive  vindication. 
With  this  interpretation  of  his  messianic  consciousness  his  use  of  titles  is  in 
general  agreement.  Titles  suggesting  the  political  aspect  of  messianism, 
such  as  "Son  of  David,"  made  no  appeal  to  him,  and  if  he  did  not  in  every 
instance  positively  reject  them,  it  was  only  because  such  rejection  would  have 
been  interpreted  as  a  rejection  of  messiahship.     "Son  of  God"  as  a  title 

27 


28  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

would  seem  not  to  have  been  used  by  him  as  a  self-designation,  yet  as 
much  is  involved  in  the  recurring  expressions  "the  Son"  and  "the  Father;" 
his  sonship  was  personal,  moral,  and  religious,  and  in  the  accounts  as 
they  stand  there  is  the  implication  of  something  more.  His  most  frequent 
self-designation  seems  to  have  been  "Son  of  man."  He  is  never  represented 
as  having  been  so  addressed  by  others.  Both  the  Old  Testament  con- 
ception of  man's  frailty  and  lowly  estate  and  the  influential  passage  in 
Daniel  (7:13,  14)  may  have  been  factors  leading  to  the  choice  of  the  title. 
That  he  was  influenced  strongly  by  the  high  apocalyptic  use  in  the  Book 
of  Enoch  is  not  clear,  though  it  is  certain  that  his  followers  came  to  attach 
that  meaning  to  the  term  in  application  to  Jesus,  with  all  that  it  involved. 
Jesus  appears  to  have  used  the  title  mostly  toward  the  close  of  his  career, 
suggesting  that  then  his  consciousness  assumed  more  strongly  the  messianic 
form.  It  came  to  mean  for  him  that  the  messianic  glory  was  to  be  obtained 
by  renunciation,  suffering,  and  death. 

It  is  not  assumed  that  the  above  sketch  even  remotely  does  justice  to 
the  subject,  but  the  problem  is  too  intricate  to  justify  at  this  point  a  satis- 
factory exhibit  of  the  processes  by  which  the  conclusions  have  been  reached, 
or  final  judgment  has  been  withheld,  as  the  case  may  be.  The  gospels 
will  again  come  before  us  for  consideration  in  this  discussion.  Certain 
results  of  criticism  may  be  confidently  set  forth  and  the  direction  in  which 
they  point  indicated.  The  recognition  of  Matthew  and  Luke  as  composite 
works,  one  of  whose  sources  is  the  Gospel  of  Mark,  enables  us  to  discover 
many  heightened  christological  features  of  Matthew  and  Luke,  and 
throws  us  back  upon  the  simpler  presentations  of  Mark  and  the  other 
sources.  Yet  here  too  we  must  bear  in  mind  that  the  writers  of  these 
sources  were  not  especially  interested  in  historical  sequence  and  connec- 
tion, but  were  concerned  to  awaken  and  foster  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Christ 
and  to  secure  obedience  to  him  as  Lord.  The  eschatological  discourses 
of  Mark,  chap.  13,  Matt.,  chap.  24,  and  Luke,  chap.  21,  seem  to  have 
taken  their  present  form  not  earlier  than  70  a.  d.,  and  there  is  much  else 
in  the  discourse-material  that  bears  marks  of  later  origin.  For  example, 
one  passage  in  which  the  speaker  is  the  Wisdom  of  God  appears  to  be  a 
prophetic  fragment  from  some  Wisdom-writing  of  about  70  a.  d.  (Luke 
11:49-51;  Matt.  23:34,  35).  There  is  specific  mention  of  the  murder 
of  Zachariah,  son  of  Barachiah,  whom  Josephus  mentions  as  having  been 
slain  in  the  temple  in  68  a.  d.  Certain  passages  bear  indications  of  origin 
within  the  Jewish-Christian  community.  Side  by  side  with  passages  of 
great  spiritual  freedom  there  are  in  Matthew  expressions  of  narrowness 
and  circumscribed  sympathy  that  sound  strange  in  the  mouth  of  Jesus — 

28 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  29 

a  high  valuation  of  the  law,  an  express  limitation  of  his  mission  to  the 
Jews,  a  command  to  obey  the  Jewish  leaders  (Matt.  5:18,  19;  10:5,  6; 
23:3).  The  emphasis  especially  in  Matthew  on  eschatology — on  Jesus 
as  the  coming  king  and  judge  and  the  Twelve  as  judges  of  the  twelve  tribes 
of  Israel  in  the  regeneration — is,  as  we  shall  see  when  we  treat  of  that  topic, 
so  in  line  with  the  messianism  of  Jewish  Christianity  that  we  hesitate  to 
carry  it  all  back  to  Jesus  himself.  Justice  must  be  done  to  the  unique 
reUgious  genius  and  moral  power  of  Jesus,  of  which  there  can  be  no  reason- 
able doubt.  Constant  factors  in  all  estimates  of  his  thought  and  person 
should  be  the  effects  of  his  coming  and  the  influence  he  exerted.  But  when 
criticism  has  eliminated  much  that  is  fantastic  and  traceable  to  other 
sources  than  his  own  thought,  it  yet  leaves  in  his  consciousness  a  mysterious 
element  that  may  properly  be  called  messianic:  there  are  mighty  stirrings 
and  strivings  in  his  soul,  there  is  a  spirit  of  exaltation  and  expectancy, 
there  is  the  conviction  of  a  unique  vocation  as  God's  last  messenger  to  men. 
It  is  not  enough  to  say  that  the  title  Messiah  was  imposed  upon  him  by 
historical  conditions  and  was  something  altogether  external  to  him;  it 
answered,  to  be  sure  inadequately,  to  something  in  his  own  consciousness. 
In  the  impressive  language  of  H.  J.  Holtzmann,'  as  his  forerunner  John 
was  a  prophet  and  more  than  a  prophet,  so  he  was  the  Messiah  and  more 
than  a  Messiah. 

There  were  other  features  in  the  overmastering  personality  of  Jesus 
that  influenced  christological  doctrine  in  the  course  of  its  development, 
but  an  adequate  presentation  of  these  would  involve  us  in  an  extended 
historical  study  and  estimate  of  Jesus  for  which  there  is  here  no  place. 
Suffice  it  to  recall  his  consciousness  of  filial  relationship  to  God  which  lies 
at  the  root  of  his  messianic  consciousness  and  behind  all  his  activity,  the 
universalism  at  the  heart  of  his  message  and  work,  his  extraordinary  dignity 
and  authority  lifting  him  above  past  and  contemporary  religious  authorities, 
and  the  ideal  of  life  he  held  up  and  enjoined  with  all  of  its  social  impUca- 
tions,  and  the  abiding  spiritual  impression  of  his  personal  character. 

I  Das  messianische  Bewusstsein  Jesu,  S.  100. 


29 


III.    JEWISH-CHRISTIAN  CHRISTOLOGY 

The  sources  for  our  study  of  Jewish-Christian  Christology  are  the 
genuine  epistles  of  Paul,  the  early  chapters  of  Acts,  and  the  Synoptic 
Gospels,  all  of  which  must  be  used  with  critical  caution.  We  possess  no 
literature  that  is  directly  the  product  of  the  faith  of  the  earliest  Christians. 
The  former  habit  of  so  employing  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter  and  the  Epistle 
of  James  and  of  handling  the  first  chapters  of  Acts  uncritically  is  not 
justified,  as  will  appear  when  we  come  to  consider  these  works. 

A  good  starting-point  is  the  passage  in  which  Paul  sets  forth  explicitly 
the  contents  of  the  tradition  which  he  received:  "For  I  delivered  to  you 
first  of  all  that  which  I  myself  had  received:  that  Christ  died  for  our  sins 
according  to  the  scriptures,  and  that  he  was  buried,  and  that  he  was  raised 
on  the  third  day  according  to  the  scriptures,  and  that  he  appeared  to  Cephas, 
then  to  the  Twelve.  Afterwards  he  appeared  to  more  than  five  hundred 
brethren  at  one  time,  most  of  whom  remain  until  now  but  some  have  gone 
to  their  rest.  After  that  he  appeared  to  James,  then  to  all  the  apostles. 
And  last  of  all,  as  to  one  born  at  a  wrong  time,  he  appeared  to  me  also" 
(I  Cor.  15:3-8).  We  here  note  several  elements  of  Jewish-Christian 
Christology. 

I.  Jesus  is  the  Christ.  This  Paul  assumes.  To  be  sure  Paul  uses 
the  word  "Christ"  in  this  instance  without  the  article  as  a  proper  name, 
for  when  the  Hebrew  rT'lIJ^J,  "Anointed,"  was  translated  into  Greek, 
Xptfrrd?,  the  original  Hebrew  idea  of  the  Messiah  meant  little  to  gentile 
Christians  and  xp''0"''os  became  a  proper  name.  In  some  instances  it  is  not 
clear  in  which  sense  it  is  used.  But  its  significance  for  Jewish- Christian 
Christology  is  that  the  earliest  interpretation  of  the  person  and  work  of 
Jesus  was  through  messiahship. 

Indeed  the  first  impression  that  Jesus  made  was  that  of  a  prophet; 
he  was  the  prophet  like  Moses  promised  in  Deut.  18:18,  19:  "I  will  raise 
them  up  a  prophet  from  among  their  brethren,  like  unto  thee;  and  I  will 
put  my  words  in  his  mouth,  and  he  shall  speak  unto  them  all  that  I  shall 
command  him.  And  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  whosoever  will  not  hearken 
unto  my  words  which  he  shall  speak  in  my  name,  I  will  require  it  of  him." 
This  passage  is  quoted  in  Acts  3:22,  23.  But  there  was  for  them  one 
higher  category  than  that  of  prophet;  Jesus  was  the  Messiah.  We  have 
seen  that  the  question  of  Jesus'  own  thought  on  this  subject  is  beset  with 
difficulties,  but  the  readiness  with  which  his  disciples  accepted  and  pro- 
30]  30 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  31 

claimed  his  messiahship  renders  it  almost  inconceivable  that  he  gave  them 
no  grounds  for  so  doing.  These  men  had  known  Jesus  in  the  flesh,  had 
eaten  and  drank  with  him,  and  now  they  revered  him  as  Messiah  and 
Lord  and  thought  of  him  as  the  coming  Judge. 

When  Jesus  was  thought  of  in  the  messianic  framework,  his  speedy 
return  from  heaven  to  complete  his  messianic  work  took  the  place  of  the 
first  manifestation  of  the  Messiah  in  Jewish  eschatology.  In  the  appear- 
ance of  Jesus  upon  earth  the  new  era  had  already  dawned,  but  his  work 
had  been  cut  short  and  he  would  soon  appear  on  the  clouds  of  heaven 
for  the  destruction  of  Satan,  the  god  of  this  world,  and  of  the  kingdom 
of  darkness,  and  for  the  deliverance  of  his  people.  Paul  received  from  the 
primitive  tradition — "by  the  word  of  the  Lord" — how  those  that  are  alive, 
that  are  left  unto  the  coming  (-Trapova-iav)  of  the  Lord,  shall  in  no  wise 
precede  them  that  are  fallen  asleep,  etc.  (I  Thess.  4:i5ff.).  Under  the 
inspiration  of  early  Christian  prophetism  pictures  of  the  future  were  painted 
like  those  of  Paul  (such  as  in  I  Cor.  15:55  ff.),  of  the  Apocalypse  of  John, 
and  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  At  the  common  meal  in  which  the  fellow- 
ship of  the  brethren  came  to  expression  the  thoughts  of  all  were  centered 
upon  the  Savior  and  especially  upon  his  glorious  return. 

2.  Christ  died  for  men's  sins.  The  representation  in  Acts  is  that  in  the 
primitive  Christian  community  the  acceptance  of  Jesus  as  the  Christ 
brought  with  it  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  but  in  the  passage  before  us  a  further 
step  is  taken  when  connection  is  made  between  Christ's  death  and  men's 
release  from  sin.  Paul's  language  at  this  point  is  not  to  be  taken  as  in 
itself  conclusive,  but  there  is  every  probability  that  very  early  the  disciples 
were  not  content  with  the  assurance  that  the  death  of  Jesus  had  been 
foretold  in  the  Scriptures,  but  that  being  familiar  vidth  the  conception  of 
atonement  by  the  shedding  of  blood,  they  regarded  his  death  in  the  aspect 
of  a  sacrifice  offered  to  God.  In  IV  Mace.  6:27-29  the  idea  appears 
that  the  martyrdom  of  the  righteous  has  atoning  merit. 

3.  Jesus  was  raised  from  the  dead  on  the  third  day  and  appeared  to 
his  disciples  on  the  six  occasions  mentioned.  The  first  recorded  appearance 
was  to  Peter,  of  which  we  seem  to  have  a  hint  in  our  earliest  gospel  (Mark 
16:7).  The  last  appearance  was  to  Paul  himself,  and  is  not  referred  to 
by  him  as  being  in  a  different  class  from  the  others.  Something  of  the 
character  of  this  appearance  to  Paul  may  be  inferred  from  his  references 
elsewhere  to  the  revelation  of  Christ  that  was  made  to  him.  In  I  Cor. 
9:1  he  exclaims:  "Am  I  not  an  apostle?  Have  I  not  seen  Jesus  our 
Lord?"  In  Gal.  1:15,  16  he  says:  God  "saw  fit  ....  to  reveal  his 
Son  in  me."    We  have  an  indirect  reference  in  II  Cor.  4:6:   "God  .... 

31 


32  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

shone  in  upon  our  hearts,  to  give  the  illumination  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
glory  of  God  on  the  face  of  Christ."  Elsewhere  he  speaks  of  "visions  and 
revelations  of  the  Lord"  (oTrrao-ias  koI  airoKakvij/eL^  Kvptov)  subsequently 
received  (II  Cor.  12:1).  The  view  of  Pfleiderer  that  Paul  did  not  in  his 
own  mind  connect  these  appearances  vdth  the  body  of  Jesus  that  was 
laid  in  the  grave  seems  highly  improbable.'  Note  the  words:  "He  was 
raised  on  the  third  day."  For  Paul  these  appearances  were  special  and 
unique.  What  we  may  infer  from  the  references  of  Paul,  both  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  appearance  to  him  and  consequently  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
appearances  to  others  that  preceded  his,  is  another  question. 

With  this  testimony  from  our  primary  source  there  is  no  room  for 
reasonable  doubt  as  to  the  reality  of  these  appearances,  both  those  to 
individuals  and  those  to  groups.  Our  other  sources — the  gospels  and 
Acts — are  in  agreement  with  Paul  that  through  some  such  experiences 
the  disciples  became  convinced  that  Jesus  had  risen,  and  that  the  primitive 
Christian  community  came  into  being  in  consequence  of  that  faith.  W'e 
recall  from  the  gospels  that  in  that  world  and  age  men  could  see  in  such 
a  one  as  Jesus,  John  the  Baptist,  Elijah,  or  one  of  the  prophets  actually 
reappearing  on  earth  (Mark  6:14-16;  8:28).  In  Matt.  27:52,  53  it  is 
reported  that  at  the  death  of  Jesus  "the  tombs  were  opened,  and  many 
bodies  of  the  saints  that  had  fallen  asleep  were  raised,  and  coming  forth 
out  of  the  tombs  after  his  resurrection  they  entered  into  the  holy  city  and 
appeared  unto  many."  The  personality  of  Jesus  made  an  impression  on 
the  hearts  and  lives  of  his  disciples  that  was  ineffaceable.  He  bound  them 
to  him  by  a  love  so  strong  that  even  his  death  could  not  separate  him  from 
them.  Their  faith  took  the  historically  conditioned  form  that  was  natural 
to  it. 

Our  sources  then  give,  as  the  ground  for  the  change  from  the  gloom 
and  despair  of  the  crucifixion  to  the  joy  and  confidence  that  soon  succeeded, 
the  appearances  of  the  risen  Lord,  although  the  exact  content  of  the  resur- 
rection-faith is  not  as  clearly  set  forth  as  the  fact  itself.  The  preparation 
for  these  experiences  consisted  in  the  general  wo  rid -view  and  the  impres- 
sions of  the  personal  hfe  of  Jesus.  For  Paul  the  resurrection  meant  that 
Jesus  had  conquered  death  and  opened  the  gates  of  life,  and  he  gave 
to  it  also  a  mystical  significance  (I  Cor.,  chap.  15;  Rom.,  chap.  6).  But 
for  the  first  community  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  meant  the  vindication 
of  his  messiahship  (Mark  12:10,  11 ;  Acts  3:15)  and  a  means  toward  his 
heavenly  exaltation.  The  elevation  of  man  to  the  sphere  of  the  gods  was 
a  thought  not  strange  to  circles  even  outside  of  Judaism.     To  specify 

I  Das  Urchristentum,  I,  S.  5  {Primitive  Christianity,  I,  p.  7). 

32 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  33 

only  Hebrew  instances,  there  were  Enoch  (Sir.  44:16;  49:14),  Moses 
(Assumption  of  Moses),  and  Elijah  (II  Kings  2:11).  The  significance  of 
the  resurrection  and  exaltation  of  Jesus  in  the  interpretation  of  his  person 
may  be  gathered  from  the  following  passages: 

Jesus  said  to  the  disciples  on  the  way  to  Emmaus:  "What  things?" 
And  they  said  to  him:  "The  things  concerning  Jesus  the  Nazarene,  who 
was  a  prophet  (dvrjp  Trpo<}irJTrj<;)  mighty  in  deed  and  word  before  God  and 
all  the  people;  and  how  our  chief  priests  and  rulers  delivered  him  up  to  be 
condemned  to  death  and  crucified  him.  We  hoped  however  that  it  was 
he  who  was  about  to  redeem  Israel"  (Luke  24:19-21). 

"This  Jesus  God  raised  up,  of  which  we  are  all  witnesses.  Being 
exalted  therefore  at  the  right  hand  of  God  and  having  received  from  the 
Father  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  has  poured  forth  this  which  you 
see  and  hear.  For  David  ascended  not  into  the  heavens,  but  he  says 
himself: 

The  Lord  said  to  my  Lord: 

Sit  at  my  right  hand. 
Till  I  lay  thine  enemies  under  thy  feet. 

So  let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know  assuredly  that  God  has  made  him  both 
Lord  and  Christ — this  Jesus  whom  you  crucified"  (Acts  2:32-36). 

"You  know  of  the  matter  that  came  through  all  Judea  ....  Jesus 
of  Nazareth,  how  God  anointed  him  with  the  Holy  Spirit  and  power,  and 
he  went  about  doing  good  and  healing  all  that  were  oppressed  by  the  devil, 
for  God  was  with  him  ....  whom   they  slew  ....  him   God  raised 

up  on  the  third  day  and  gave  him  to  be  made  manifest This  is 

he  who  is  ordained  (wptcr/Ae'vos)  by  God,  judge  of  living  and  dead"  (Acts 
10:37-42). 

"And  we  bring  you  good  tidings  of  the  promise  made  to  the  fathers, 
that  God  has  fulfilled  this  to  our  children  by  raising  up  Jesus,  as  also  it  is 
written  in  the  second  psalm:  Thou  art  my  Son;  to-day  have  I  begotten 
thee"  (Acts  13:32,  33). 

To  these  passages  must  be  added  two  from  Paul,  in  one  of  which  he 
says  that  Jesus  was  constituted  {bpia-Oivro^)  Son  of  God  with  power 
according  to  the  spirit  of  holiness  by  the  resurrection  from  the  dead  (Rom. 
1:4),  and  the  second  is  in  the  great  christological  passage,  most  of  which  is 
characteristically  Pauline:  "Wherefore  God  also  highly  exalted  him 
and  gave  him  the  name  which  is  above  every  name" — the  name  of  Lord 
(Phil.  2:9-11;  Kupios,  for  TWTT  in  the  Septuagint;  see  Isa.  42:8;  45:23). 

Now  these  passages  clearly  point  toward  an  original  Adoptionist 
Christology:   Jesus  became  the  Son  of  God  and  Messiah  by  a  divine  act 

33 


34  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

of  adoption  connected  with  the  resurrection  from  the  dead  and  the  exaltation 
to  heaven  at  God's  right  hand.  The  use  of  the  second  psalm  is  instructive. 
From  ancient  times  in  the  Orient  kings  were  regarded  gods  or  of  diAine 
origin.  Amid  the  plottings  of  the  rulers  of  the  earth  against  Yahweh  and 
against  his  Anointed,  God  gives  assurance  to  the  king  on  the  day  of  his 
accession  to  the  throne  that  he  will  give  nations  for  his  inheritance  and  the 
uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  his  possession.  When  the  passage  is 
quoted  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  the  thought  of  the  writer  can  hardly 
be  that  the  divine  sonship  of  Jesus  began  at  some  particular  time  (Heb. 
1:5),  but  the  earlier  view  was  that  the  divine  sonship  of  Jesus  was  not 
by  nature  and  from  eternity,  but  that  he  was  raised  to  it  by  an  act  of  God. 
In  the  gospel-tradition  there  was  the  story  how  God  had  already  chosen 
him  as  his  Son  at  the  Baptism  and  by  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  consecrated 
him  the  Messiah  and  endowed  him  with  messianic  power,  and  still  later 
the  divine  act  was  pushed  back  to  his  birth.  In  the  Lukan  account  of 
the  Baptism,  Codex  D,  the  very  words  of  Ps.  2:7  occur  (Luke  3:22). 
Old  Testament  analogies  are  the  anointings  of  Saul  and  of  Da\dd  by 
Samuel  (I  Sam.  10:1;  16:13),  in  each  instance  a  period  elapsing  before 
accession  to  the  throne,  as  in  the  case  of  Jesus.  It  is  evident  that  the  hope 
of  establishing  an  earthly  Davidic  kingdom  was  still  in  some  sense  aUve 
in  Jewish-Christian  circles.  The  Palestinian  hymns  of  the  first  chapters 
of  Luke  breathe  the  same  spirit.  The  genealogies  of  Matthew  and  Luke, 
giving  the  list  of  ancestors  of  Jesus  in  direct  line  from  David  to  Joseph, 
were  intended  to  prove  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah.  Paul  knows  the 
tradition — "bom  of  the  seed  of  David  according  to  the  flesh"  (Rom. 
1:3).  In  discussing  with  the  scribes  Jesus  seems  to  have  tried  to  show 
that  the  Messiah  need  not  necessarily  be  a  descendant  of  Da\'id,  though 
this  is  certainly  not  the  thought  of  the  evangelist  who  reports  the  incident 
(Mark  12:35). 

But  this  Adoptionist  Christology  does  not  represent  the  whole  thought 
of  the  Jewish-Christian  community  regarding  Jesus.  Paul  makes  use  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  pre-existence  of  Christ  as  though  it  were  already  famiUar. 
It  was  easily  taken  over  from  messianism.  We  have  seen  how  in  the  Simili- 
tudes of  Enoch  (37-70)  the  Son  of  man  is  described  as  hidden  with  God 
before  the  world  was  and  manifested  as  judge  of  men  and  angels.  The 
idea  was  that  precious  persons  and  things  were  of  heavenly  origin,  and 
everything  of  real  value  that  appeared  on  earth  had  its  existence  in  heaven 
(Exod.  25:9,  40;  26:30;  27:8;  Nimi.  8:4;  Ps.  139:15,  16;  Gal.  4: 
26;  Heb.  12:22;  Apoc.  21:2).  On  the  other  hand,  the  Greek  conception 
of  pre-existence  was  based  on  the  contrast  between  spirit  and  matter  and 

34 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  35 

pre-temporal  existence  was  deemed  a  certainty  only  in  the  case  of  higher 
and  purer  spirits.  It  cannot  be  said  that  the  notion  of  a  pre-existent 
Messiah  was  widespread  in  Judaism  or  that  it  played  a  large  part.  Cer- 
tainly the  thought  of  the  first  disciples  was  quite  different  from  Paul's,  for 
the  Jewish  conception  of  the  Messiah's  appearance  on  earth  was  neither 
that  of  an  incarnation  nor  of  a  humiliation.  But  undoubtedly  in  identify- 
ing Jesus  with  the  Son  of  man  of  Jewish  apocalyptic  the  first  disciples 
were  bordering  closely  upon  the  idea  that  he  was  not  merely  a  man  who 
had  been  exalted  to  heavenly  glory,  but  was  originally  a  heavenly  being 
who  had  come  down  to  earth. 

4.  The  Old  Testament  scriptures  were  used  as  foreshadowing  both  the 
death  and  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  Doubtless  the  passages  appealed 
to  as  foretelling  his  suffering  and  death  were  those  telhng  of  the  suffering 
Servant  of  Yahweh  (Isa.,  chaps.  52,  53;  cf.  Acts  8:30  ff.).  The  stumbling- 
block  of  his  death  could  be  removed,  if,  in  addition  to  his  resurrection 
and  exaltation,  proof  were  adduced  that  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ 
were  in  accord  with  the  Old  Testament  vocation  of  the  Messiah  and 
founded  in  the  counsel  of  God.  The  passage  used  as  foretelling  his 
resurrection  may  very  well  have  been  Ps.  16:10,  as  found  in  Peter's  sermon, 
Acts  2 :  27,  and  also  in  the  mouth  of  Paul  at  Antioch  of  Pisidia,  Acts  13 :  35. 
Other  passages  that  may  have  been  used  in  this  connection  are  Ps.  86:13 
and  Hos.  6:2. 

But  not  only  were  the  death  and  resurrection  found  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment but  almost  everything  else  in  the  evangelic  tradition."  Of  course  it 
worked  the  other  way  also:  what  was  in  the  Old  Testament  must  have 
been  in  the  life  of  Jesus.  Accordingly  it  is  to  be  expected  that  some  material 
which  found  its  way  into  the  gospels  had  its  beginnings  in  primitive 
Christianity. 

We  close  this  section  with  some  reflections  on  the  significance  of  Jewish- 
Christian  Christology.  We  have  seen  that  in  Judaism  along  with  devotion 
to  their  divinely  given  law  there  was  the  faith-element  of  the  messianic 
hope.  Among  the  early  Christians  the  latter  element  eclipsed  the  former. 
In  Paul's  account  of  the  controversy  about  the  law  recorded  in  the  second 
chapter  of  Galatians  he  takes  it  as  common  ground  that  all  who  believed 
on  Christ  Jesus  did  so  in  order  that  they  might  be  justified  by  faith  in 
Christ,  but  it  had  never  occurred  to  his  Jewish-Christian  opponents  that 
faith  in  Christ  entirely  set  aside  the  Jewish  law  and  abolished  legalism. 
To  their  minds  this  would  make  Christ  a  minister  of  sin.     To  them  it 

I  For  instance,  the  parousia  was  seen  in  Zech.  12:10:   "They  shall  look  unto  me 
whom  they  have  pierced,"  quoted  in  Apoc.  1:7. 

35 


36  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

was  not  a  question  of  faith  in  Jesus  or  observance  of  the  law.  Their  hope 
was  really  not  in  the  law  but  in  the  Lord  at  his  coming.  Faith  in  Jesus 
and  hope  of  the  kingdom  were  working  a  change  of  attitude.  The  story 
of  Stephen  in  Acts  points  toward  a  larger  freedom  and  a  deeper  insight 
into  the  implications  of  the  gospel  on  the  part  especially  of  converts  among 
the  Hellenists. 

The  thinking  and  preaching  of  the  first  disciples  were  not  primarily 
concerned  with  the  gospel  of  the  fatherliness  of  God,  prominent  in  the 
teaching  of  Jesus.  Theirs  was  another  problem.  They  must  prove  to 
their  countrymen  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah,  and  would  shortly  return  to 
establish  the  kingdom.  His  crucifixion  was  the  obstacle  in  the  way,  but 
that  was  foreshadowed  by  Scripture  and  its  force  destroyed  by  the  resurrec- 
tion. For  them  Jesus  was  the  Servant  of  God,  a  man  approved  of  God, 
constituted  the  Christ,  raised  from  the  tomb,  exalted  in  the  heavens,  to 
come  again  to  complete  the  messianic  work.  The  miracle  of  the  resur- 
rection and  his  exaltation  cast  a  halo  about  his  earthly  life,  removing  him 
from  men  and  investing  his  person  with  mystery.  Looking  toward  the 
future  they  made  him  the  center  of  their  eschatology,  the  chief  part  of 
which  they  drew  from  Jewish  apocalyptic.  They  were  attempting  to 
express  what  they  had  experienced  in  Jesus,  and  their  expression  was  more 
prophetic  and  practical  than  doctrinal.  Their  own  state  was  one  of 
ecstasy  and  exaltation,  one  of  their  charismata  from  the  heavenly  world 
being  "speaking  with  tongues,"  described  by  Paul  in  I  Cor.,  chap.  14; 
and  they  beheld  Jesus  as  their  risen  and  exalted  Lord. 

We  often  meet  with  the  statement  that  in  this  period  the  Christians  were 
nothing  more  than  a  Jewish  sect,^  and  that  their  Christology  was  nothing 
more  than  the  framework  of  Jewish  messianism  with  the  name  of  Jesus 
written  in  it.  Thus  Wernle  concludes:  "The  Jewish  faith  swallowed  up 
the  Christian,  and  in  reality  it  was  the  Jews  who  came  forth  the  conquerors 
from  these  disputes."^  Of  course  it  is  true  that  the  Christian  movement  was 
within  Judaism;  that  as  Jesus  never  intended  to  found  a  "church,"  that 
is,  an  institution,  so  the  early  Jerusalem  disciples  remained  members 
of  the  Jewish  church,  and  to  them  the  idea  of  two  churches  was  an  impos- 
sible one.  Their  aim  was  to  convince  other  Jews  that  Jesus  was  their 
Messiah.  In  this  sense  the  Christian  community  formed  a  Jevdsh  sect, 
but  it  was  something  more.     Although  Jesus  had  in  his  own  thought 

1  For  example,  Clemen,  Die  Entwicklung  der  christlichen  Religion  inner halb  des 
Nenen  Testaments,  S.  74. 

2  Die  Anfange  unserer  Religion,  erste  Auflage,  S.  85  {The  Beginnings  of 
Christianity,  I,  p.  141). 

36 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  37 

transformed,  purified,  spiritualized,  and  enriched  the  term  Messiah  in  its 
application  to  himself,  yet  his  disciples  did  not  in  this  respect  altogether 
understand  him,  and  after  his  death  the  older  elements  were  retained  in 
the  term.  Nevertheless  there  was  much  involved  in  thinking  of  Jesus 
in  the  messianic  framework.  The  resurrection  of  the  Messiah  was  not  an 
element  in  Jewish  messianism  because  he  was  not  expected  to  die.'  Another 
new  element  was  the  redemptive  significance  of  his  death.  The  second 
coming  simply  corresponded  to  the  messianic  first  coming.  So  far  all 
seems  formal.  But  related  to  it  all  there  was  a  rich  religious  experience 
that  was  new  and  creative.  There  was  something  tangible  and  concrete 
about  a  Christ  who  had  actually  lived  among  men,  who  had  been  raised 
from  the  dead,  had  been  seen  in  his  glorified  state,  and  to  whom  (or  through 
whom)  one  could  pray,  as  did  Stephen,  according  to  the  testimony  of 
Acts,  in  the  words:  "Lord  Jesus,  receive  my  spirit"  (Acts  7 :  59).  Through 
the  presence  and  power  of  the  Spirit  that  Jesus  sent  down  from  heaven 
there  was  an  enthusiastic  hfe,  a  joyousness,  an  assurance  of  acquittal  at 
the  coming  judgment,  a  faith-principle,  that  current,  somber,  depressing 
Judaism  conspicuously  lacked. 

The  noblest  and  truest  expression  of  their  new  experience  of  Jesus  the 
Christ  was  to  be  seen  in  their  preparation  for  the  kingdom,  the  new  order 
about  to  be  estabUshed  at  the  Lord's  return.  This  preparation  consisted 
of  repentance  and  righteousness,  but  essentially  it  was  a  social  phenomenon, 
a  real  brotherhood.  The  poor  were  relieved  by  means  of  a  common 
fund.  The  Lord's  Supper — "the  breaking  of  bread,"  Acts  2:42,  46 — 
was  a  fellowship-meal.  Through  this  practical  Christian  brotherhood 
Jesus,  the  helper  of  the  helpless,  the  friend  of  sinners,  the  refuge  of 
the  heavy-laden,  came  to  his  own,  and  thereby  Christianity  conquered 
the  world. 2  Beneath  the  thought-forms  of  the  primitive  church  which 
have  been  occupying  our  attention  there  Hes  the  gospel,  and  in  the 
experience  of  these  first  disciples  was  manifested  the  practical  Christian 
Ufe. 

Moreover  we  must  not  forget  that  the  primitive  Christian  community 
possessed  the  priceless  tradition  of  Jesus'  own  imperishable  words  and 
deeds.  Narrowness  and  legalism  were  far  from  being  hopeless  for  those 
who  possessed  a  measure  of  his  spirit  and  the  memory  of  his  words  and 
conduct.  Indeed,  it  is  by  no  means  incredible  that  one  of  the  number, 
Stephen,  should  have  come  near  to  grasping  the  very  heart -principle  of 

1  Yet  see  Apoc.  of  Ezra  7 :  29. 

2  See  Pfleiderer,  Das  Urchristentum,  I,  S.  22,  23  {Primitive  Christianity,  I, 
P-  32). 

37 


38  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

the  gospel,  Christian  freedom;  and,  because  he  proclaimed  it,  to  have 
brought  martyrdom  upon  himself  and  persecution  upon  the  other  disciples. 
Had  primitive  Christianity  been  nothing  more  than  a  sect  of  Judaism,  Paul 
the  Pharisee  would  not  have  been  found  so  zealously  persecuting  it,  nor 
would  he  have  been  powerfully  converted  to  a  religion  that  was  essentially 
the  same  as  that  which  he  held. 


38 


IV.     PAULINE  CHRISTOLOGY 

The  letters  upon  which  this  treatment  is  based  are  Galatians,  First 
and  Second  Corinthians,  Romans,  First  Thessalonians,  Philippians,  and 
Philemon.  Others  are  reserved  for  later  consideration.'  In  these  letters 
there  is  found  no  development  in  his  conception  of  Christ  of  which  it  is 
necessary  to  take  account.  The  first  of  the  letters  to  be  written,  whether 
First  Thessalonians  or  Galatians,  was  written  not  far  from  a  score  of 
years  after  his  conversion,  and  all  of  them  fall  within  a  period  of  twelve  years. 
He  was  at  the  time  a  mature  man,  aged  somewhere  between  forty-five 
and  sixty-five.  Varying  circumstances  elicited  differing  forms  of  expres- 
sion, but  for  him  there  was  one  original  gospel. 

Four  factors  in  the  formation  of  his  Christology  may  be  mentioned, 
but  not  always  distinguished:  pre-Pauline  Christian  thought,  Jewish 
thought,  gentile  thought,  and  his  own  creative  personality.  No  more 
original  and  influential  thinker  has  appeared  in  the  history  of  the  Christian 
church.^  Yet  his  primary  purpose  was  not  to  give  Christianity  doctrinal 
expression,  but  to  preach  Christ;  he  was  first  a  missionary,  and  secondly 
a  theologian.  His  epistles  were  called  forth  by  the  exigencies  of  his  mis- 
sionary work  and  adapted  to  the  needs  of  the  churches.  Vital  as  was  his 
conception  of  the  person  of  Christ  in  his  apprehension  of  Christianity,  his 
Christology  was  with  a  view  to  Soteriology,  and  must  be  studied  from  that 
point  of  view.  But  he  has  a  Christology  that  is  original  and  thought  out, 
because  he  was  powerfully  intellectual;  he  felt  the  true  theologian's  necessity 
for  harmonizing  convictions  growing  out  of  his  religious  experience  with 
the  rest  of  his  thought  which  he  held  in  common  with  the  age.  To  this 
fundamental  need  of  his  nature  is  added  the  fact  of  his  rabbinical  training. 
Though  he  was  more  than  a  rabbinic  dialectician,  still  it  is  essential  to 

1  It  is  now  generally  recognized  among  scholars  that  the  Pastoral  Epistles  are  in 
their  present  form  not  from  the  hand  of  Paul.  Second  Thessalonians  and  Ephesians 
are  regarded  as  doubtful,  especially  the  latter.  The  tendency  at  present  is  to  defend 
the  Pauline  authorship  of  Colossians.  Most  scholars  do  not  take  seriously  the  conten- 
tion of  a  few  critics  that  all  the  Pauline  letters  belong  to  a  later  time. 

2  The  fact  is  that  Paul  comes  near  being  the  only  perfectly  clear  figure  among 
the  Christians  of  the  first  century.  Both  the  immediate  disciples  of  Jesus  and  the 
Christians  of  the  age  succeeding  Paul  are  more  or  less  shadowy.  We  have  seen  how 
difficult  of  historical  access  is  Jesus  himself,  though  on  account  of  his  dominating 
personality  and  universalism  Jesus  does  stand  out  before  us  as  not  even  Paul  does. 
The  point  is  that  for  Paul  we  possess  direct  sources.  See  Wrede,  Paulus,  S.  i,  2 
(Eng.  trans.,  pp.  xi,  xii). 

39]  39 


40  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

remember  that  his  education  was  Jewish;  he  knew  the  Hebrew  scriptures, 
though  he  generally  quotes  from  the  Septuagint;  he  was  trained  in  Jewish 
theology  and  rabbinical  methods  of  interpretation.  So  while  in  the  Jewish- 
Christian  church  certain  conclusions  about  Jesus  had  been  reached  through 
reflection  and  in  recommending  him  to  the  Jews,  chiefly  in  connection  with 
his  messiahship  and  its  corollaries,  yet  no  such  man  as  Paul  had  arisen  who 
felt  the  necessity  upon  him  of  thinking  things  through  theologically  and 
who  had  the  ability  to  do  so. 

A  third  factor  in  the  situation  ought,  however,  not  to  be  underestimated: 
he  was  a  Hellenist  as  well  as  a  Pharisee.  His  knowledge  of  the  Greek 
language  and  Greek  Bible  is  in  itself  a  matter  of  great  importance.  His 
native  city  of  Tarsus  was  a  university  city  and  a  seat  of  Stoicism.  Under 
these  circumstances  a  universal  horizon  and  a  broad  and  human  interest 
were  almost  inevitable  for  such  a  man  as  Paul.  This  side  of  his  nature 
was  brought  out  when  he  became  not  only  a  Jew  to  the  Jews  but  a  Greek 
to  the  Greeks  and  took  up  his  work  among  gentiles.  He  had  not  only  to 
discuss  daily  in  synagogue  and  market-place  ^vith  Jews  (Acts  17:17),  but 
also  to  take  account  of  Paganism  and  adapt  his  message  to  the  heathen. 
Philosophic  Hellenism  had  its  conviction  of  the  supremacy  of  the  spirit,  its 
desire  for  freedom  from  the  sensuous,  its  ideals  of  exaltation  above  the 
world  and  of  communion  with  the  divine  life,  its  belief  in  immortality; 
and  while  Paul  did  not  as  a  scholar  know  Greek  philosophy,  yet  to  the 
Greek  world  he  did  successfully  minister. 

It  was  Paul's  repeated  and  earnest  contention  that  he  derived  his 
gospel  from  no  human  source,  but  from  the  revelation  of  God's  Son  in  him; 
from  God  and  Christ  he  received  his  apostleship  and  authority  to  preach, 
and  the  very  content  of  his  preaching  as  well  (Gal.  1:1,  11,  12;  2:8; 
I  Cor.  1:1,  17;  II  Cor.  10:8;  13:10;  Rom.  1:1).  Not  seldom  the  Lord 
is  referred  to  as  his  authority  in  certain  specific  matters  (I  Cor.  7:10,  12, 
25;  9:14;  11:23;  I  Thess.  4:15).  Yet  we  have  it  on  his  own  statement 
that  his  gospel  was  substantially  that  of  the  Jerusalem  Christians  (Gal. 
2:6-9).  -^^  ^^s^  ^^  ^^^  ^^^  Palestinian  Christians  were  at  one,  even  in 
regard  to  salvation  by  faith,  at  least  nominally  so  (Gal.  2:15,  16).  The 
trouble  came  when  he  emphasized  salvation  by  grace  in  opposition  to 
Jewish  particularism  and  acted  upon  his  principles  in  the  evangelization 
of  the  gentiles.  More  than  once  Paul  acknowledges  his  dependence  upon 
the  primitive  Christian  tradition  (e.  g.,  I  Cor.  11 :23;  15:3).  He  acquired 
knowledge  of  the  historical  character  and  teaching  of  Jesus  both  before 
and  after  his  conversion.  For  instance,  his  recognition  of  the  law  of  love 
as  the  regulative  principle  of  the  Christian  life  undoubtedly  had  its  source 

40 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  41 

in  the  character  and  teaching  of  Jesus  hiinself.  But  much  more  than  that: 
his  acquaintance  with  the  earthly  life  and  teaching  of  Jesus  was  more 
extensive  than  some  scholars  have  supposed,  impressed  as  they  are  with 
the  fact  that  Paul  dwells  upon  the  glorified  Redeemer  and  says  compara- 
tively little  about  the  earthly  experiences  of  Jesus.  What  Paul  knew  about 
Jesus  was  just  what  other  Christians  in  general  knew,  for  all  alike  were 
insti-ucted  in  the  evangelic  tradition,  not  to  dwell  upon  what  ever  remains 
the  greatest  source  of  knowledge — the  life,  the  conduct,  of  those  animated 
by  his  spirit.  Paul  found  a  Christian  community  at  Damascus  (Gal. 
1:17;  11  Cor.  II  :32,  33).  On  his  visit  of  a  fortnight  to  Jerusalem  he  had 
the  opportunity  of  interviev^ng  Peter,  who  had  been  with  Jesus,  and  others 
whose  knowledge  was  personal  (Gal.  1:18,  19).  His  association  with 
Barnabas  (Gal.  2:1,  9;  Acts  11:25)  and  with  the  churches  of  Syria  and 
CiUcia,  in  fact  his  whole  contact  with  Christian  communities  which  he 
himself  did  not  found,  could  have  no  other  result  than  to  acquaint  him  vdth 
the  common  church  tradition  about  Jesus.  It  also  formed  in  all  probability 
a  part  of  his  own  preaching,  a  primary  duty  being  the  instruction  of  his 
own  converts  on  the  subject.  A  curious  confirmation  of  this  is  found  in 
Aramaic  words  which  he  transliterated  and  taught  to  his  gentile  readers 
and  which  have  found  their  way  into  the  epistles  (ay8/3a,  Gal.  4:6;  Rom. 
8:15;    /^.apava^a,  I  Cor.  16:22).^ 

It  is  impossible  here  to  give  a  full  and  adequate  presentation  of  the 
Pauline  Christology;  all  that  is  attempted  is  an  indication  of  what  is 
distinctive  in  his  thought  about  Christ.  His  contribution  to  Christology 
may  be  exhibited  under  five  heads,  to  which  is  added  a  paragraph  on 
eschatology:  the  pre-existent  and  incarnate  Lord,  the  crucified  Redeemer, 
the  cosmic  Savior,  the  indweUing  Christ,  the  divine  Son  of  God,  the  coming 
Lord.  In  the  treatment  of  future  topics  we  shall  have  occasion  often  to 
recur  to  the  teaching  of  Paul. 

I.  There  is  good  reason  to  believe  that  when  the  Jewish-Christian 
community  applied  to  Jesus  the  category  of  messiahship,  in  spite  of  his 
own  cautious  use  of  the  term  as  applied  to  himself,  they  felt  that  all  that 
the  Jews  expected  of  the  Messiah  must  be  true  of  him.  Now  in  Jewish 
thought  the  Messiah  was  waiting  in  the  heavens  for  the  time  of  his  mani- 
festation, when  he  would  come  in  pomp  and  power  for  the  overthrow  of 
his  enemies  and  the  salvation  of  God's  people.  Irv  this  view  much  of  the 
messianic  work  was  deferred  in  thought  to  a  second  coming;  the  pre- 
existence  was  taken  for  granted.     But  whether  this  pre-existence  was  to 

'  See  Case,  "Paul's  Historical  Relation  to  the  First  Disciples,"  American  Journal 
of  Theology,  1907,  p.  269. 

41 


42  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

their  thought  ideal,  existing  in  the  mind  of  God,  or,  as  is  more  likely,  per- 
sonal, the  Jewish  Christians  probably  made  no  such  ethical  use  of  it  as  Paul. 
He  speaks  of  the  pre-existence  of  Christ  as  familiar  to  his  readers  and 
undisputed.  The  Man  from  heaven  of  apocalyptic  speculation,  who  had 
existed  from  all  time  with  God,  out  of  love  for  man  left  his  high  estate,  came 
from  heavenly  glory  to  earth,  to  participate  in  the  lowly  fortunes  of  men 
for  their  redemption.  Originally  of  a  different  nature  from  us,  he  became 
like  us  and  took  our  nature;  was  born  of  a  woman,  became  a  real  but 
sinless  man,  died  on  the  cross,  and  was  buried.  His  nature  was  thus 
judged  not  from  his  appearance  in  the  flesh,  but  from  his  heavenly  origin. 
The  resurrection  proved  him  to  be  the  Son  of  God.  He  returned  to  glory 
and  will  come  again  to  complete  his  messianic  work  in  the  consummation 
of  the  age.  Paul  could  have  found  examples  of  Christ's  love  and  self- 
sacrifice  in  the  life  of  Jesus;  indeed,  he  did  center  his  thought  upon  the 
supreme  example  of  his  death.  But  he  was  dominated  by  the  Jewish 
speculative  idea,  and  viewed  the  nature  and  the  work  of  Jesus  from  the 
point  of  view  of  the  heavenly  Christ.  However,  Wernle's  way  of  putting 
it  does  not  help  us  to  understand  Paul;  he  says:  "Doubtless  this  whole 
point  of  view  is  a  myth  from  beginning  to  end,  and  cannot  be  termed  any- 
thing else;"  it  is  the  "story  of  a  God  who  had  descended  from  heaven."  ' 
It  was  rather  the  transformation  of  a  current  Jewish  speculation  into  an 
ethical  and  spiritual  doctrine,  resulting  from  the  impression  Jesus  had  made 
upon  Paul;  the  end  was  practical:  it  means  the  divine  love  manifesting 
itself  in  the  incarnation,  an  example  of  service,  sacrifice,  humility,  obedience 
— more  than  that,  a  God  who  redeems  us,  enters  our  hfe,  and  secures  our 
renewal,  personal  communion,  and  sonship  (II  Cor.  8:9;  Phil.  2:5-11). 
But  what  was  Paul's  conception  of  the  human  nature  of  Jesus  ?  Between 
the  two  periods  of  the  Son  of  God's  existence  in  heaven  there  comes  that 
of  the  incarnate  life,  the  himailiation.  His  becoming  poor  (II  Cor.  8:9) 
is  sometimes  taken  to  refer  to  a  state  of  earthly  poverty,  and  there  may 
indeed  be  a  secondary  reminiscence  of  the  fact  that  Jesus  was  lowly,  but 
the  primary  thought  is  that  he  abandoned  the  riches  of  heaven  for  a  human 
life.  Paul's  language  implies  that  the  manhood  of  Jesus  Christ  was 
assumed  and  formal.  We  are  even  reminded  of  the  docetic  teachers  of  a 
later  period,  but  the  reality  of  the  humanity  of  Christ  is  essential  to  the 
thought  of  Paul;  that  is  to  say,  he  was  born  into  the  world  in  a  human 
way,  possessed  a  body  of  flesh,  and  was  subject  to  death.  To  what  extent 
did  he  also  possess  human  thought,  feeling,  and  will  ?     Paul  does  not  say 

'  Die  Anfdnge  unserer  Religion,    erste   Auflage,  S.  154     {Beginnings  of  Chris- 
tianity, I,  p.  251). 

42 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  43 

that  the  Son  of  God  became  man,  but  that  "he  emptied  himself,  taking 
the  form  of  a  bond-servant,  coming  in  Hkeness  (ev  o/xotw/iart)  of  men, 
and  being  found  in  fashion  (crx^/Aarc)  as  a  man  he  humbled  himself"  (Phil. 
2:7),  and  that  God  sent  his  own  son  ev  6/u,ota)/xaTt  crapKos  d/naprtas  (Rom. 

8:3)-' 

2.  We  have  seen  that  according  to  his  own  testimony  Paul  received 

in  the  primitive  tradition  the  fact  that  Christ  died  for  the  sins  of  believers 
(I  Cor.  15:3).  The  contradiction  between  the  ignominious  death  and  the 
messianic  vocation  was  felt  by  him  as  keenly  as  by  the  Jewish-Christian 
community  {to  o-KavSaXov  tov  a-ravpov,  Gal.  5:11;  I  Cor.  1:23).  He 
grappled  with  the  problem  seriously  and  boldly,  and  permanently  influenced 
the  thinking  of  the  church.  He  developed,  explained,  and  enriched  the 
primitive  connection  in  thought  between  the  death  of  Christ  and  his  saving 
work.  His  new  spiritual  life  would  not  seem  to  have  needed  help  from 
thought  of  the  death  of  Christ,  for  its  strength  was  drawn  from  communion 
with  the  risen  Lord;  yet  the  death  had  to  be  explained.  Somehow  it 
must  be  a  fact  of  supreme  significance,  and  so  Paul  came  to  regard  it  as 
the  culmination  and  crowning  glory  of  Christ's  saving  work.  From  his 
point  of  view  there  was  no  special  help  to  be  gained  from  dweUing  upon 
the  historical  situation;  he  makes  but  one  reference  to  it  (I  Thess.  2:15). 
It  must  be  looked  at  from  above,  and  in  the  Ught  of  his  own  vision-experi- 
ence of  the  risen  and  glorified  Christ.  Jesus  was  a  curse  (Karapa),  but 
it  was  virkp  yffjiiliv  (Gal.  3:13).  Though  holy,  he  was  made  sin  on  our 
behalf  (II  Cor.  5:21,  viv\p  rnxdv  apapTtav  eTToirjaev) .  The  cross  becomes 
the  symbol  of  the  divine  condescension,  in  which  Paul  glories  (Gal.  6:14). 
It  is  a  sacrifice  God  himself  has  furnished,  which  men  have  only  to  accept; 
he  was  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world  to  himself;  it  is  an  expression  and 
assurance  of  his  love  (Rom.  5:8;  8:32). 

But  how  was  a  sacrifice  necessary  ?  There  is  an  aspect  of  the  divine 
character  expressed  by  the  words  opy?/  and  StKatoo-wT^.  God  disapproves 
sin,  and  the  death  of  Christ  is  an  IvSci^ts  t^s  8iKaioavvr)<;  airov  (Rom. 
3 :  25).  So  Paul  uses  a  rich  variety  of  expressions:  those  implying  substitu- 
tion (xnrip  or  Trepl  iifiwv,  or  Twv  afuipTLWv  r/fiCyv,  not  however  avTi  vfxwv)^ 
redemption  (aTroAvrpwo-is),  reconciliation  (KaraXAayi;),  propitiation 
(iXao-TT^ptov,  Rom.  3:25),  the  language  of  sacrifice  (blood),  Christ  as  our 
passover  who  has  been  sacrificed  (I  Cor.  5:7).'  In  one  instance,  the 
notable  passage  in  Rom.  3:21-26,  Paul  undertakes  to  explain  why  it  was 

1  "  Die  Menschheit  ist  ihm  also  eigentlich  etwas  Fremdes,  ein  Bettlergewand,  das 
der  himmlische  Konigssohn  fiir  eine  Weile  iiberwirft,  um  es  wieder  abzustreifen." 
— Wrede,  Paulus,  S.  55    (Eng.  trans.,  p.  90). 

43 


44  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

necessary  that  Christ  should  die,  the  reason  being  that  God  had  in  his 
forbearance  formeriy  passed  over  sins,  with  the  result  of  creating  the 
suspicion  that  he  was  indifferent  to  them;  but  to  erect  this  into  Paul's 
theory  of  the  atonement  is  to  give  it  undue  weight  and  to  ignore  the  obvious 
meaning  of  his  language  elsewhere.  In  Paul's  thought  there  was  not  merely 
a  substitution  of  methods,  but  a  transfer  of  penalty,  a  transaction  (if  the 
meaning  of  the  word  is  not  pushed  too  far),  an  expiation,  a  propitiation. 
That  his  way  of  looking  at  it  is  not  acceptable  to  some  modern  men  does 
not  argue  invaUdity  in  his  reasoning  for  him.  For  he  had  been  trained 
in  Jewish  law.  Deissmann  thinks  that  the  forensic  terms  he  uses  could 
have  been  heard  daily  in  the  police-courts  of  Greek  cities,  but  the  decisive 
factor  with  Paul  at  this  point  was  probably  his  Jewish  theology.  He  was 
not  a  slave  to  it;  he  has  given  us  abundant  evidence  that  when  he  chose, 
he  could  use  vital  analogies.  Certainly  the  religio-ethical  element  is 
present,  and  indeed  dominant,  in  his  thought.  It  is  a  mistake,  however, 
to  deny  and  explain  away  the  other. 

3.  The  original  Christology  and  controversy  centered  in  the  messiah- 
ship  of  Jesus,  but  more  was  involved  in  the  affirmation  of  such  messiah- 
ship  than  was  at  first  reaUzed.  It  was  Paul's  great  office  to  discern  that 
the  gospel  of  Jesus  is  different  from  the  religion  of  law  and  to  lay  bare  the 
radical  opposition  between  Judaism,  the  reUgion  of  law,  and  Christianity, 
the  religion  of  spirit,  grace,  faith,  and  ethical  freedom.  For  him,  there- 
fore, the  maintenance  of  the  messianic  claim  for  Jesus  meant  the  exposition 
and  defense  of  a  new  morality  and  a  new  attitude  toward  life.  The 
Jewish  teachers  themselves  discerned  in  the  person  and  message  of  Jesus 
the  antithesis  of  that  for  which  they  stood,  but  Jewish  opposition  to  the 
Jewish-Christian  church  was  principally  not  from  the  side  of  the  Pharisaic 
party,  but  from  the  priestly,  Sadducean  custodians  of  law  and  order  (Acts 
4:1).  Paul's  penetration  into  the  heart  of  the  gospel  was  deeper  and  his 
horizon  broader;  so  it  devolved  upon  him  to  bring  into  the  light  of  day 
the  universalism  implicit  in  Christianity  from  the  beginning.  For  him 
Jesus  was  not  only  a  Jewish  Messiah,  but  much  more  a  world-Redeemer. 
Paul  eliminated  what  was  merely  Jewish  and  national,  and  drew  to  the 
person  of  Jesus  the  larger  and  universal  aspirations  of  men.^     Jesus 

»  Paul  retained  belief  in  the  special  role  reserved  for  Israel  (Rom.  11:25-32),  but 
in  the  church  at  large  this  remnant  of  Jewish  nationalism  could  not  long  exist  along- 
side of  the  Pauline  universal  conception  of  Christ's  work.  The  increasing  enmity  of 
the  Jews  against  Christians,  the  diminishing  influence  of  Jewish  Christianity,  and  the 
destruction  of  the  temple  and  holy  city  and  of  the  Jewish  people  as  a  nation,  contributed 
toward  ehminating  the  hope  for  Israel  Kara  (rdpKa.  The  Old  Testament  promises 
were  then  taken  to  refer  to  the  new  nation.     The  admission  of  the  law  for  JevAish 

44 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  45 

Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  died  for  all  men,  and  his  death  was  a  cosmic  fact, 
holding  the  center  of  the  worid's  history.  Through  him  are  all  things, 
and  his  relation  to  mankind  is  original  and  organic  (I  Cor.  8:6).  The 
heavenly,  second  Man  may  have  been  Paul's  equivalent  for  the  Son  of 
man  of  Daniel  and  the  first  Christian  community,  but  his  cosmic  concep- 
tion gave  to  Jesus  a  significance  like  that  of  Adam,  the  father  of  the  race; 
as  the  second  Adam,  the  head  and  founder  of  a  new  humanity,  he  recovers 
what  Adam  lost,  and  in  him  a  new  human  epoch  takes  its  rise  (I  Cor., 
chap.  15;  Rom.,  chap.  5).  As  Adam  started  the  race  wrong  and  down- 
ward, so  Christ  comes  and  makes  a  complete  break  in  history,  sets  up  a 
new  human  line,  and  starts  the  race  anew.  He  is  6  lo-;(aTos  'ASayu,,  6  Sewepos 
av^poJTTOS  ii  ovpavov.^ 

4.  A  point  at  which  Paul  departed  fundamentally  in  his  Christology 
from  his  predecessors  and  contemporaries  and  where  he  is  independent, 
individual,  and  original,  is  in  his  conception  of  the  indwelling  Christ. 
What  manner  of  life  Jesus  lived  on  earth  Paul  learned  from  others  and  he 
acknowledged  his  indebtedness  to  the  primitive  tradition;  but  the  heart 
of  his  Christology  was  built  on  the  basis  of  his  inner  experience,  on  the 
risen  Christ  who  had  appeared  to  him,  whom  he  knew  directly  and  not 
by  hearsay.  Paul  did  not  distinguish  sharply  in  his  experience  between 
the  influence  of  Christ  and  that  of  the  Spirit  (I  Cor.  15:45;  II  Cor.  3:17). 
In  the  Jewish-Christian  community  the  Spirit  was  the  source  of  ecstasy  and 
special  endowments;  Paul  transferred  the  Spirit's  activity  to  the  entire 
ethical  and  religious  life  of  the  believer,  in  union  with  God  and  in  fellow- 
Christians  was  but  a  temporary  expedient;  Jewish  Christianity  and  universal  Christian- 
ity could  not  long  exist  side  by  side.  Paul's  doctrine  that  the  law  was  divine  in 
origin  and  holy,  but  abrogated  and  not  binding  upon  gentile  Christians,  was  quite 
difficult,  till  the  allegorical  interpretation  made  possible  a  "spiritual"  understanding 
of  the  ceremonial  ordinances.  On  the  national  side  the  extreme  is  reached  in 
the  Fourth  Gospel,  which  mentions  the  Jews  in  terms  of  the  divine  rejection,  though 
their  pre-Christian  status  was  one  of  privilege  (1:47;  4:22).  On  the  anti-ceremo- 
nial side  the  extreme  among  orthodox  churchmen  was  reached  in  Barnabas,  who 
rejected  the  cultus  and  legal  ordinances  of  the  Old  Testament  as  a  diabolical 
misrepresentation,  claiming  the  Old  Testament  exclusively  for  Christianity.  It  was 
a  short  step  to  Gnosticism,  which  regarded  Judaism  and  the  Old  Testament  as  the 
work  of  the  devil  and  the  Demiurge.  See  Harnack,  Apostclgeschichte,  S.  9,  211-17 
{Ads  of  the  Apostles,  pp.  xxv,  281  ff.). 

I  In  the  second  century  Christians  spoke  of  themselves  as  a  separate  race.  Aris- 
tides  says  that  there  are  four  races  of  men  in  this  world:  barbarians  and  Greeks, 
Jews  and  Christians;  and  that  the  barbarians  reckon  their  head  from  Kronos,  the 
Greeks  from  Zeus,  the  Jews  from  Abraham,  and  the  Christians  from  Jesus  Christ. — 
Apology,  2. 

45 


46  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

ship  with  Christ.  In  his  own  experience  the  presence  of  the  Spirit  was 
that  of  Christ,  and  meant  life,  freedom,  sonship,  as  well  as  certain  specific 
gifts  of  the  Spirit  (I  Cor.  12:4-11).  The  pre-Pauline  thought  about 
Jesus  was  of  an  external  character:  Jesus  was  in  heaven,  exalted  at  the 
right  hand  of  God,  and  he  sent  down  his  Spirit  upon  men.  Paul  needed 
no  such  mediation;  Jesus  himself  was  a  life-giving  Spirit,  and  he  saved  a 
man  by  taking  up  his  abode  within  him  (Gal.  1:16;  2:20;  3:27;  4:6, 
19;  Rom.  8:10).  Under  the  control  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ  he  was  freed 
from  bondage  to  the  flesh;  he  died  with  Christ  to  the  flesh  and  rose  with 
him  to  the  new  Hfe  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  experience  of  others  is  described 
in  the  same  terms  as  his  own  (Gal.  2:20;  II  Cor.  4:10;  Rom.,  chap.  6; 
7:4;  8:10;   Phil.  3:10). 

The  union  between  the  believer  and  the  risen  Christ  was  certainly  one 
of  disposition,  mind,  heart,  will,  character,  but  it  was  more;  it  was  an 
organic  union,  corresponding  to  the  physical  relation  between  men  and 
Adam  (I  Cor.  15:47-49).  In  the  case  of  the  natural  man  and  Adam 
the  basis  of  the  union  was  the  a-dpi;  in  the  case  of  the  spiritual  man  and 
Christ  the  basis  was  the  Trvevfxa  (I  Cor.  6:17).  In  becoming  united  to 
Christ  a  man  becomes  a  partaker  with  him  of  the  divine  nature  or  irvcvfjM. 
His  personality  being  in  harmony  with  the  Spirit,  he  is  a  spiritual  man 
(Gal.  4:6;  5:16,17;  I  Cor.  2:12;  6:11;  12:13;  H  Cor.  1:22;  5:16,17). 
He  is  master  of  the  lower  nature  (Gal.  5 :  16-18,  24;  I  Cor.  6:15,  16;  Rom. 
8:4,  5,  12-15).  He  is  a  free  man  (Gal.  2:19;  3:24-27;  5:13,  18;  Rom. 
6:14;  7:6;  10:4).  Yet  the  life  is  a  fulfilling  of  that  inner,  spiritual  law 
which  represents  the  divine  character  and  will  (Gal.  5:14;  Rom.  7:14; 
8:4;  13:8-10).  But  while  the  flesh  remains  there  must  still  be  a  struggle, 
and  a  man  may  lose  his  hold  on  Christ.  Final  salvation  means  release 
from  the  flesh  and  resurrection  in  a  new,  spiritual  body,  suited  to  the 
heavenly  life  (I  Cor.  15:54-57;  Rom.  6:8-10,  23;  8:23;   13:11). 

This  organic  relationship  is  not  only  with  the  individual,  but  is  also 
with  the  body  of  believers,  the  brotherhood  (iKKXrjcrLa) ;  the  church  is  the 
body  of  Christ  (I  Cor.  12:12,  27).  The  communion  is  realized  in  the 
Supper  (I  Cor.  10:16,  17;  11:23,  29).  Paul  knew  what  according  to  the 
evangelic  tradition  Jesus  said  about  his  death  being  for  the  benefit  of  his 
followers,  and  his  identification  of  the  bread  and  wine  with  his  body  and 
blood.  How  further  he  came  to  his  profound  conceptions  of  oneness  and 
fellowship  with  the  glorified  Christ  and  participation  in  the  life  of  God 
through  him  is  not  easy  to  determine.  His  thinking  was  akin  to  the 
longings  of  fine  religious  spirits  among  the  Greeks.  Justin,  writing  just 
beyond  the  middle  of  the  second  Christian  century,  says  that  to  look  upon 

46 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  47 

God  is  the  end  of  Plato's  philosophy  (Karoif/eadai  tov  deov — tovto  yap 
TcAos  T^s  nXaTwvos  <f>i\oaocf>ias. — Dialogue  with  TrypJto,  2:6). 

5.  Titles  of  Jesus  which  Paul  look  over  from  the  Jewish-Christian 
community  assumed  for  him  new  meaning.  There  was  in  general  a 
broadening  and  a  heightening.  Even  during  his  earthly  life  Jesus  was 
called  "Lord,"  the  Semitic  term,  "17J,  preserved  by  Paul,  being  applicable 
to  God  to  indicate  rulership  and  to  men  deemed  worthy  of  special  honor, 
such  as  the  king.  After  the  resurrection  and  exaltation  of  Jesus  the  term 
in  its  application  to  Jesus  was  proportionately  elevated.  The  early  Pales- 
tinian disciples  who  spoke  Aramaic  called  Jesus  "our  Lord"  ("pTJ) — a 
form  preserved  not  only  by  Paul  (I  Cor.  16:22),  but  also  in  the  Didache 
(10 : 6).  When  Christian  missionaries  came  to  transfer  Hebrew  and  Aramaic 
terms  to  Greek,  Kvptos  had  to  do  service  for  mn"'  and  "'Dli^,  as  in  the  Sep- 
tuagint,  and  for  "i7J.  So  a  common  expression  with  Paul,  based  on  the  Ara- 
maic, is  6  Kvptos  YifiSiv.  There  was  a  tendency  to  reserve  Kvptos  for  Jesus 
and  use  0eds  of  God.  The  address  of  prayer  to  Jesus  and  the  apphcation 
to  him  of  Old  Testament  passages  that  originally  referred  to  God  indicated 
that  in  their  thought  God  and  Jesus  occupied  similar  positions  in  relation 
to  men.  But  the  Jewish  Christians  were  strictly  monotheists,  and  did 
not  go  to  the  length  of  caUing  Jesus  God.  Their  heaven-exalted  saints  and 
heroes  like  Enoch  and  Moses  and  Elijah  were  not  thought  divine,  and  even 
the  Messiah  was  but  a  heavenly  being  chosen  and  sent  by  God.  As  in 
modern  Greek,  Kvpte  was  but  a  poUte  form  of  address,  used  in  speaking 
to  others  as  well  as  to  God  or  Jesus.  But  for  Jevrish  Christianity  Kupios 
was  employed  to  express  the  heavenly,  spiritual  authority  of  Jesus  the 
Christ  over  the  community.^  Now  Paul  was  a  Jew,  and  therefore  a 
monotheist ;  and  although  among  the  heathen  there  were  gods  many  and 
lords  many,  for  him  as  for  Mohammed  there  was  no  God  but  one — the 
Father,  of  whom  are  all  things  (I  Cor.  8:4-6).^  But  there  was  also  one 
Lord,  Jesus  Christ,  through  whom  are  all  things  and  we  through  him,  and 
as  we  shall  see,  the  recognition  of  this  mediatorship  for  Paul's  thought 
carried  the  movement  well  on  the  way  toward  the  high  Christology  sub- 
sequently reached. 

Now  no  such  monotheism  prevailed  in  the  gentile  world.  No  insuper- 
able diflaculty  was  experienced  in  ascribing  deity  to  Jesus.  Their  heroes 
were  called  gods,  and  the  emperor  was  worshiped ;  surely  Jesus  was  deserv- 

"  See  Case,  "Kvpios  as  a  Title  for  Christ,"  Journal  of  Biblical  Literature,  Vol. 
XXVI,  1907. 

»  J.  Weiss  {Christus,  S.  29)  thinks  that  in  the  much-discussed  passage,  Rom.  9:5, 
Christ  is  called  God,  but  that  the  text  is  corrupt. 

47 


48  HISTORICAL   AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

ing  of  no  less  an  honor.  It  is  reported  that  at  Lystra  when  Paul  healed  a 
lame  man,  the  crowd  cried  out:  "The  gods  are  come  down  to  us  in  the 
likeness  of  men;"  and  they  called  Barnabas  Zeus  and  Paul  Hermes,  and 
the  priest  of  Zeus  brought  bulls  and  garlands  and  desired  to  sacrifice  with 
the  crowd  (Acts  14:8-13).  Again,  on  the  island  of  Melita,  when  Paul 
unharmed  shook  a  snake  from  his  arm  into  the  fire,  the  friendly  barbarians 
said  he  was  a  god  (Acts  28:1-6).  To  this  gentile  public  Christianity 
had  to  be  presented,  and  the  problems  were  vastly  different  from  those  of 
the  Jewish  apologetic.  Jesus  must  be  set  forth  not  as  the  Jews'  Messiah, 
but  as  the  divine  Savior,  the  world's  Redeemer  from  sin.  Savior,  the 
Latin  form,  is  the  gentile  equivalent  for  Messiah;  for  the  Jews  themselves 
were  after  salvation,  and  their  hopes  went  out  after  a  coming  Deliverer. 
Accordingly  by  Paul  and  after  his  time  Jesus  is  interpreted  as  a  world- 
character;  as  in  the  gospels,  where  he  appears  as  a  miracle-worker,  a 
demon-conqueror,  Lord  over  nature,  one  who  commissions  for  world- 
evangehsm. 

The  title  "Son  of  God"  conveyed  a  different  meaning  to  the  Greek 
mind  from  the  impression  conveyed  to  the  Semitic  mind.  The  older 
Hebrew  conception  was  mostly  an  ethical  one;  God's  son  was  his  chosen, 
his  beloved.  The  gentile  took  the  title  literally.  He  did  not  distinguish 
between  a  heavenly  being  who  was  not  God  and  God  himself,  and  Ignatius 
did  not  hesitate  to  call  Jesus  God.  Paul  stopped  short  of  this,  but  went 
so  far  as  not  only  to  accommodate  himself  to  gentile  needs,  but  in  his  o^vn 
thinking  to  fall  into  their  modes  of  thought.  The  Son  of  God  was  by 
nature  son;  he  had  been  with  God  from  eternity,  existing  in  the  di\dne 
form  and  being  equal  with  God.  As  has  been  already  emphasized,  to 
Paul's  thought  the  Son  stands  in  a  relation  of  subordination  to  and  depend- 
ence on  God  (I  Cor.  3:23;  15:24-28;  Phil.  2:9-11).  In  one  passage 
Paul  says  that  Jesus  was  appointed  (or  constituted,  6pLcr9evTo<s)  Son  of 
God  with  power  according  to  a  spirit  of  holiness  by  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead  (Rom.  1:4);  but  elsewhere  it  is  clear  that  his  thought  is  that  Jesus 
did  not  have  to  become  the  Son  of  God,  his  divine  sonship  being  essential 
and  coextensive  with  his  existence  (Gal.  4:4;  Rom.  8:3,  32). 

Yet  his  humanity  was  real.  Paul  speaks  as  though  his  was  a  normal 
human  birth  (Gal.  4:4;  Rom.  1:3),  and  mentions  the  Lord's  brothers 
(Gal.  I  :i9;   I  Cor.  9:5). 

The  messianic  concept  was  inadequate  to  express  Paul's  thought 
of  Christ.  It  alone  was  not  able  to  secure  for  him  fellowship  with  God. 
It  failed  to  do  justice  to  his  experience.  It  did  not  express  his  conviction 
that  the  inward,  spiritual  authority  of  Christ  was  superior  to  the  external 

48 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  49 

authority  of  law.  It  did  not  meet  the  needs  of  worid-redemption.  It  was 
uninteRigible  to  his  gentile  hearers.  The  political  aspects  of  messianism 
seem  never  to  have  made  any  appeal  to  him.  One  thing  he  did  know — 
that  God  had  apprehended  him  through  Christ;  the  Hght  of  the  knowledge 
of  God's  glory  had  shone  upon  him  from  Jesus  Christ  (II  Cor.  4:6).  No 
relation  between  a  merely  angelic  being  and  God  would  answer  to  such 
facts  of  experience.  Only  one  who  is  outside  the  category  of  creation, 
the  representation  and  manifestation  of  God,  possessing  God's  own  nature 
— God's  own  Son — is  able  to  meet  the  needs  of  experience.  In  this  Paul 
has  influenced  the  later  thinking  of  the  church.  But  the  movement  was 
already  under  way.  In  Paul  the  deeper  thought-currents  of  the  age, 
growing  naturally  out  of  the  situation,  found  profound  and  victorious 
expression. 

6.  Perhaps  the  most  striking  and  significant  fact  in  connection  with 
Paul's  eschatological  views  is  that  while  he  takes  over  the  whole  eschato- 
logical-messianic  programme  from  Judaism,  at  the  same  time  he  practically 
transcends  it,  being  lifted  above  its  limitations  by  the  power  and  dominance 
of  his  religio-ethical  thought.  For  example,  formally  justification  is 
acquittal  at  the  Judgment-Day,  practically  it  is  realizable  at  once.  Like  all 
other  Christians  of  his  age,  he  held  that  the  consummation  had  not  yet 
been  realized,  and  Christ  must  come  again  to  complete  his  messianic 
work;  and  yet  his  emphasis  is  upon  what  Christ  has  already  done  by  his 
incarnation,  death,  and  resurrection  to  achieve  salvation,  and  upon  his 
present  activity  as  the  living  Savior.  The  unhealthful  tendencies  toward 
ecstasy  and  idleness  that  early  manifested  themselves  under  the  glowing 
expectation  of  the  Lord's  speedy  return  in  glory  and  of  the  catastrophic 
passing-away  of  the  present  order  were  rebuked  by  Paul,  who  transferred 
the  emphasis  from  the  future  to  the  blessings  and  duties  of  the  present: 
the  state  of  acceptance  with  God,  sonship,  spiritual  freedom,  love  of  the 
brethren,  and  social  duties  with  respect  to  the  state,  marriage,  property, 
and  labor.  The  final  judgment  is  described  after  the  current  Jewish 
manner  as  according  to  deeds  (II  Cor.  5:10),  but  in  his  characteristic 
thought  Paul  does  not  believe  that  a  man's  standing  before  God  is  legalis- 
tically  determined.  The  resurrection  of  Christ  was  as  for  the  first  disciples 
an  assurance  of  the  messiahship  of  Jesus;  it  was  also  a  guaranty  of  the 
final  resurrection  of  believers,  who  on  account  of  thdr  personal  relation  to 
Christ  (I  Cor.  15:23)  are  to  return  to  full  vitality  in  a  body  suited  to  the 
spirit  (crw/Aa  TrvevfxxiTtKov).  In  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  the  sovereignty 
of  death  was  aboHshed;  and  although  physical  death  remained,  it  was  no 
longer  as  to  the  Jew  regarded  as  punishment  for  sin,  for  its  sting  was 

49 


50  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

removed  for  those  who  had  already  died  to  sin  and  the  flesh  and  entered 
upon  the  new  life  in  the  Spirit.  Sometimes  Paul  writes  as  though  there 
were  an  intermediate  state  of  sleep  (I  Thess.  4:14;  I  Cor.  15:51),  and  again 
as  though  the  believer  passed  to  the  resurrection-Ufe  at  death  (II  Cor.  5 : 1-9) 
and  to  depart  were  to  be  with  Christ  (Phil.  1:23).  Evidence  of  a  real 
development  or  change  in  Paul's  thought  vnth  reference  to  the  parousia 
is  wanting  in  his  epistles;  if  in  the  earlier  letters  he  writes  as  though  he 
expected  the  Lord  to  return  in  his  own  lifetime  (I  Thess.  4:17;  I  Cor.  1 5 : 
51),  in  Rome  he  is  still  waiting  for  a  Savior,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  (Phil. 
3:20).  If,  as  his  end  drew  near,  he  did  not  think  the  Lord  would  return 
before  his  own  death,  that  would  indicate  no  fundamental  change  in  his 
thought. 

A  second  point  of  interest  in  Paul's  eschatology  is  his  attitude  toward 
the  present  world  and  his  view  of  its  destiny.  He  is  concerned  with  it 
only  in  its  moral  aspect.  As  an  evangelist  and  missionary  he  is  zealous 
to  rescue  "from  this  present  evil  age"  (Gal.  1:4)  as  many  of  his  o\\'n  race 
and  as  many  out  of  heathenism  as  possible.  As  a  pious  Jew,  though  a 
Christian,  he  lived  in  the  consciousness  of  impending  judgment.  Jews, 
gentiles,  and  even  the  material  world  were  doomed  and  bound  for  destruc- 
tion. The  pious  Hebrew  believed  that  the  world  was  so  wicked  that  a 
flood  was  needed  to  wipe  out  the  existing  race  of  men  and  make  a  new 
start.  So  Paul  thought  that  all  men  were  under  the  condemnation  of 
death,  on  account  of  Adam's  sin  and  their  ov^m.  The  flesh  was  weak,  so 
that  although  man  desired  to  be  free,  he  was  a  slave.  The  world  was  ruled 
by  powers  hostile  to  God.  This  dark  picture  was  Paul's  inheritance. 
But  on  the  road  to  Damascus  he  saw  a  great  light.  In  the  resurrection 
of  the  Lord  whom  he  beheld  the  reign  of  death  came  to  an  end,  and  the 
world  of  Satan  became  for  him  God's  world.  The  Spirit  of  Jesus  took 
possession  of  the  heart  that  had  been  irredeemably  evil  and  energized  the 
impotent  will.  In  the  cross  he  found  no  longer  a  stumbling-block,  but  a 
message  of  grace  and  love.  Now  the  eschatological  work  of  Christ  was 
glorious  for  the  comparatively  few  who  were  among  the  saved,  but  it  was 
hard  on  his  enemies.  Paul  preached  glad  tidings.  But  what  was  to  be 
the  fate  of  those  who  died  in  impenitence  ?  Paul  does  not  resort  to  the 
ingenious  expedient  of  supposing  that  upon  his  descent  to  Hades  between 
his  death  and  resurrection  Christ  preached  the  gospel  to  imprisoned  souls, 
but  there  is  evidence  that  he  found  a  way  out.  Here  as  elsewhere  his  dom- 
inantly  ethical  nature  asserted  itself.  Perhaps  it  would  not  be  to  the  point 
to  appeal  to  the  fact  that  the  redeeming  work  of  Christ  is  described  as 
coextensive  with  the  ruin  wrought   by  sin  (I  Cor.  15:22;     Rom.  5:18), 

50 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHBISTOLOGY  51 

and  that  universal  terms  are  used  of  Christ's  complete  triumph  which  to 
us  may  seem  hardly  in  keeping  with  the  salvation  of  comparatively  few. 
There  are,  however,  other  indications  that  tend  to  relieve  him  of  the  pessi- 
mism sometimes  ascribed  to  him.  Against  an  insistence  upon  conscious 
acceptance  of  Christ  irrespective  of  opportunity  as  the  basis  of  acceptance 
with  God  we  have  only  to  recall  the  instance  of  such  Old  Testament  saints 
as  Abraham.  In  its  higher  and  more  blessed  stages  faith  was  in  Paul's 
thought  the  act  by  which  the  believer  identifies  himself  with  Christ,  but 
fundamentally  it  was  a  moral  attitude — a  receptive  and  obedient  relation 
of  the  soul  toward  God  and  truth.  The  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from 
heaven  against  all  impiety  and  unrighteousness  of  men  who  suppress  the 
truth  in  unrighteousness  (Rom.  i :  i8).  Character  is  the  basis  of  judgment, 
for  the  judgment  of  God  is  according  to  truth,  and  God  will  render  to 
each  according  to  his  works;  to  them  that  by  patience  of  well-doing  seek 
for  glory  and  honor  and  incorruption,  eternal  life,  but  to  them  that  are 
factious  and  disobedient  to  the  truth  and  obedient  to  unrighteousness, 
wrath  and  indignation  (Rom.  2:2,  6-8).  For  there  is  no  respect  of  persons 
with  God;  each  shall  be  treated  in  accordance  with  his  circumstances 
(Rom.  2:11).  Even  the  gentiles  possess  conscience,  by  which  they  stand 
or  fall  (Rom.  2:14,  15). 

Paul  was  a  many-sided  man,  through  whom  flowed  the  currents  of 
the  age,  and  it  is  too  much  to  ask  of  him  that  he  always  be  rigidly  logical 
and  consistent. 


51 


V.     CHRISTOLOGY  IN  THE  SYNOPTIC  GOSPELS  AND  ACTS 

The  christological  importance  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  for  our  period 
is  not  commensurate  with  their  central  place  as  sources  of  the  knowledge 
of  Jesus.  The  picture  of  Jesus  presented  therein  was  not  the  leading 
factor  in  christological  development.  Other  factors  determined  the  course 
of  that  development  and  the  christological  forms,  so  that  the  tendency- 
was  more  and  more  to  oliscure  Jesus  as  a  historical  person.  Yet  the 
S)moptic  Gospels,  in  spite  of  their  own  Christology,  have  by  virtue  of  the 
memory  of  Jesus  they  preserve  ever  acted  as  a  check  upon  alien  speculation 
and  recalled  the  Christian  church  to  the  historic  basis  of  its  faith.  The 
memorabilia  of  Jesus  have  proved  themselves  a  powerful  vitalizing  ethical 
and  religious  force.  An  illustration  may  be  given  in  the  case  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel:  its  wonderful  ethical  and  reUgious  power  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
combined  ^vith  its  theological  interpretation  is  a  penetrating  insight  into  the 
personaUty  and  character  of  Jesus.  In  thus  emphasizing  the  central  impor- 
tance of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  as  preserving  the  knowledge  of  Jesus  it  is 
not  intimated  that  the  attempt  to  interpret  him  theologically  could  or 
should  have  been  avoided.  The  effort  to  understand  the  real  significance 
of  Jesus,  to  place  the  proper  estimate  upon  him,  to  explain  him  by  the 
means  and  in  the  forms  at  their  disposal,  was  inevitable  and  necessary  to 
the  success  of  the  Christian  movement. 

It  is  then  a  matter  of  the  greatest  significance  that  along  with  the 
development  of  christological  doctrine  the  church  was  interested  in  main- 
taining the  historical  picture  of  him  whom  they  sought  first  to  explain 
messianically.  Accepting  the  messianic  estimate  they  worshiped  him  as 
the  risen  and  exalted  Redeemer  and  looked  forward  to  his  coming  again 
in  glory,  but  they  looked  also  toward  the  past  and  fixed  their  gaze  upon 
Jesus.  Some  of  the  first  generation  had  seen  him ;  others  had  to  rely  upon 
the  tradition  of  his  mighty  deeds  and  words.  As  the  eyewitnesses  were  pass- 
ing away  the  church  felt  the  need  of  gathering  and  preserving  in  writing 
the  oral  tradition.  It  is  the  Palestinian  community  we  have  ultimately  to 
thank  for  the  preservation  of  the  evangelic  tradition, '  inevitably  embellished 
as  it  is  with  their  reflections  upon  his  glorified  life  and  their  messianic  hopes. 
In  Palestine  the  original  disciples  of  the  Master  were  gathered  and  there 
the  memory  of  his  works  and  words  was  cherished.  A  conservative  group, 
they  wanted  to  be  true  to  his  teaching  and  example,  and  so  they  brought 

'  Yet  justice  must  be  done  to  the  gentile  Christians,  who  carried  farther  the 
gospel-making  process,  and  to  whom  we  owe  our  four  canonical  gospels. 
52]  52 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHBISTOLOGY  53 

together  his  sayings  and  deeds  in  collections  for  practical  guidance.  His 
works  of  wisdom,  power,  and  goodness,  fulfilling  Old  Testament  prophecy, 
were  pointed  to  for  confirmation  of  his  messiahship.  On  earth  Jesus,  though 
still  a  man,  was  equipped  with  the  Spirit  and  power. 

Paul  worshiped  the  risen,  eternal  Christ  who  for  but  a  brief  space  had 
appeared  among  men  in  Jesus,  to  bring  to  an  end  the  curse  of  the  law,  and 
so  in  his  letters  he  makes  comparatively  little  use  of  the  evangelic  tradition, 
though  he  was  familiar  with  it  and  doubtless  made  larger  use  of  it  on  other 
occasions.  To  him  it  was  of  first  importance  that  Christ  had  come  into 
the  world,  died  on  the  cross,  and  risen  from  the  dead.  But  others  felt  the 
need  of  returning  to  Jesus  as  he  lived  on  earth.  The  author  of  First  Peter 
finds  inspiration  in  his  suffering  and  patience,  and  the  writer  of  Hebrews 
makes  especially  striking  use  of  the  evangelic  tradition  (as  in  5 : 7-9).  In  the 
literature  of  the  second  century  there  is  frequent  appeal  to  what  the  Lord 
had  said  or  commanded.  In  some  instances  we  find  a  great  deal  of  gospel- 
material,  as  in  the  Didache  in  its  present  form  and  in  Justin.  In  like  manner 
the  sayings  of  great  rabbis  were  gradually  collected  by  the  Jews.  After  Paul 
and  others  had  introduced  Christianity  into  the  gentile  world,  Jewish  Chris- 
tianity of  Palestine  assumed  less  and  less  of  importance ;  it  was  off  to  the  side, 
out  of  the  strong  current  of  progress.  Yet  these  Palestinian  Jewish  Chris- 
tians left  to  the  church  the  legacy  of  the  evangelic  tradition.  The  next  step 
was  the  translation  of  the  Aramaic  collections  for  the  Greek-speaking  world. 

Luke  says  that  already  many  had  taken  in  hand  to  draw  up  the  evangelic 
narrative.  We  know  of  the  existence  of  several  gospels  in  addition  to  those 
that  found  final  ecclesiastical  recognition,  but  such  fragments  of  them  as  we 
possess  are  too  meager  to  justify  our  taking  account  of  them  in  this  dis- 
cussion. The  authors  of  the  ones  we  possess  were  not  eyewitnesses,  but 
belonged  to  the  second  or  third  generation,  which  felt  an  interest  in  preserv- 
ing what  had  been  deUvered  to  it.  Their  christological  standpoint  was 
simply  that  of  the  generation  to  which  they  belonged.  Accordingly  their 
narratives  were  written  under  the  influence  of  their  Christology  and  had  to 
be  somehow  brought  into  relation  with  it.  It  is  easy  to  undervalue  the 
christological  material  and  influence  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  and  no  less 
a  mistake  to  look  upon  it  all  as  christological,  after  the  manner  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel.'  Many  illustrations  of  the  self-restraint  of  the  synoptists 
might  be  given;   let  one  suffice.     The  phrase  "SoU  of  man"  is  frequently 

I  For  example,  W.  A.  Brown  exaggerates  when  he  says:  "  It  is  as  true  of  the  Fourth 
Gospel  as  of  the  epistles,  and  of  the  Synoptics  as  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  that  their  sub- 
ject is  not  so  much  the  Jesus  of  history  as  the  Christ  of  faith." — Christian  Theology 
in  Outline,  p.  328. 

53 


54  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

used,  but  always  by  Jesus  himself;  it  occurs  only  once  in  Acts,  twice  in  the 
Apocalypse,  never  in  the  epistles,  and  rarely  in  other  Christian  literature  of 
the  period.  It  is  not  our  problem  to  note  what  the  synoptists  have  to  say 
about  Jesus,  but  to  determine  their  christological  standpoint.  Everywhere, 
however,  we  shall  be  confronted  with  the  difficult  task  of  distinguishing 
between  the  account  of  Jesus  in  the  sources  and  the  synoptists'  own  con- 
ceptions of  Christ.  The  task  is  simplified  by  the  fact  that  we  already  know 
in  its  main  outlines  the  prevalent  Christology  of  the  period. 

MARK 

Mark  gives  us  a  simple  and  graphic  account  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus, 
telling  only  how  he  appeared  to  men  during  the  period  between  his  baptism 
and  his  resurrection.  He  appears  to  follow  the  tradition  vrith  fidelity, 
recounting  events  and  words  without  comment  of  his  own  and  not  permitting 
his  christological  views  to  eclipse  Jesus  as  he  was.  Papias  has  set  the 
example  of  ever  distinguishing  sharply  between  the  accounts  of  Jesus' 
works  and  his  words,  perhaps  to  the  confusion  of  modern  students;'  a 
quarter  of  Mark  is  taken  up  with  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  Mark's  order  is 
intended  to  be  in  general  outline  chronological  and  does  not  accord  with 
Papias'  statement  that  he  wrote  accurately  but  not  in  order  ("dK/3i/3cjs 
€ypa\(/ev,  ov  jxevToi  ra^ei,"  Euseb.,  H.  E.  3:39:15).  The  Hebraistic 
style  suggests  that  the  book  was  written  by  a  Jew,  but  it  was  composed  in 
Greek.  It  was  not  intended  for  Palestinian  Jews  nor  for  Jews  outside 
of  Palestine,  but  for  readers  unacquainted  with  Jewish  affairs;  hence 
Aramaic  words  are  translated  and  Jewish  customs  explained  (3:17,  22; 
5:41;  7:3,  4,  II,  34;  9'-43;  10:46;  14:12,  36;  15:6,  22,  34,  42).  The 
traditional  place  of  composition  is  Rome,  and  the  numerous  Latin  words 
suggest  a  Roman  public;  yet  the  other  gospels  employ  Latinisms,  which 
had  in  considerable  number  very  naturally  found  their  way  into  the  Greek 
language.^  Chap.  13  shows  that  in  its  present  form  Mark  was  written 
after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  but  probably  not  long  after. 

The  christological  standpoint  is  manifest  in  the  opening  words:  "Begin- 
ning of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ."  Mark  presupposes  the  work  of 
Paul.  The  evangeHc  tradition  is  adapted  to  practical  use  in  the  churches. 
The  double  name  "Jesus  Christ"  in  the  opening  verse  is  significant. 
"Christ"  has  lost  its  original  messianic  meaning  and  become  a  personal 

1  The  fact  is  that  Papias  has  been  taken  too  uncritically.  There  probably  never 
existed  any  such  "Logia"  as  modern  scholars  build  upon. 

2  Grabatus,  2:4,  9,  11;  6:55;  legion,  5:9,  15;  speculator,  6:27;  denarius,  6:37; 
14:5;  sextarius,  7:4;  census,  12:14;  quadrans,  12:42;  flagello,  15:15;  praetorium, 
15:16;  spira,  15:16;  centurion,  15:39,  44,  45- 

54 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  55 

name.  To  the  gentile  Christians  for  whom  the  book  was  written  the 
Jewish  "Messiah"  meant  little.  But  the  author  knew  well  that  in  the 
lifetime  of  Jesus  the  double  name  was  not  yet  in  use,  and  so  as  he  passes 
on  to  his  narrative  he  uses  "Jesus"  only,  reserving  "Christ"  for  the  strict 
messianic  sense  (8:29;  14:61;  15:32).  Likewise  "Son  of  God"  and 
"the  Son"  are  generally  employed  in  the  historical  Old  Testament  sense 
of  one  beloved  of  God,  occupying  a  position  of  special  nearness  to  God,  in 
personal  fellowship  with  him  (i:ii;  9:7;  12:1-8).  The  idea  of  the 
centurion  at  the  cross  was  of  course  that  Jesus  was  a  hero  or  demi-god 
(15:39).  But  it  is  evident  that  for  the  author  himself  the  title  has  the 
Pauline,  theological  meaning  of  one  possessing  God's  nature.  We  are 
here  upon  a  Pauline  basis.  We  should  therefore  be  unwarranted  in 
supposing  that  because  Mark  did  not  mention  the  doctrine  of  Christ's 
pre-existence,  he  did  not  believe  in  it.  The  case  is  different  with  respect 
to  the  virgin-birth,  of  which  like  Paul  he  seems  to  have  known  nothing 
(10:47;  Rom.  1:3).'  The  Greeks  were  accustomed  to  think  of  their 
gods  in  the  form  of  men,  and  Mark  like  Paul  could  think  of  the  human 
Jesus  as  of  divine,  heavenly  origin. 

It  is  with  this  Pauline,  christological  background  that  the  whole  narra- 
tive is  to  be  read.  We  may  be  able  to  see  in  Jesus'  baptism  an  act  of  great 
significance  for  his  own  consciousness,  as  did  the  original  Jewish-Christian 
community,  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  for  Mark  it  had  such  a  meaning.^ 
As  Samuel  took  the  horn  of  oil  and  anointed  David  in  the  midst  of  his 
brethren,  and  the  Spirit  of  Jehovah  came  mightily  upon  David  from  that 
day  forward,  so  the  Spirit  descended  upon  Jesus  at  his  baptism,  designating 
him  the  Christ  and  assuring  him  of  God's  favor  (i :  10, 1 1 ;  cf.  I  Sam.  16:13); 
yet  the  voice  from  heaven  but  testified  to  a  fact  already  present.  Likewise 
the  transfiguration  was  for  the  sake  of  the  disciples,  who  had  just  confessed 
his  messiahship  and  now  beheld  him  for  a  brief  time  in  his  glory.  His 
sonship  is  of  a  character  to  be  recognized  by  supernatural  demons,  but  is 
not  easily  discovered  by  men  (3:11;  5:7).  The  primitive  conception  of 
his  miracles  as  mighty  works  and  wonders  and  signs  which  God  wrought 
by  him  is  retained  (Acts  2:22;  Mark  2:12;  5:19;  6:2,  5,  14),  but  the 
feeding  of  the  multitudes  and  the  walking  on  the  sea  are  related  in  a  matter- 
of-fact  way,  as  though  such  acts  were  to  be  expected  of  a  divine  personality 
like  the  figure  we  meet  with  in  the  Fourth  Gospel.     Yet  in  the  tradition 

I  It  is  not  unlikely  that  the  question  of  6:3:    "Is  not  this  the  carpenter,  the  son 
of  Mary  ?"  in  the  original  copy  contained  the  words  of  Luke  4: 22:   "Joseph's  son." 

'  Of  Matthew's  thought  there  can  be  no  doubt,  for  he  changes  to  the  third  person: 
"This  is  my  beloved  Son"  (Matt.  3:17). 

55 


56  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

there  were  evidences  of  limited  power  (6:5;  10:40;  14:36;  15:34). 
Jesus  knows  beforehand  about  his  sufferings  and  resurrection  in  detail 
(10:32-34),  but  knows  not  the  day  or  the  hour  of  his  return  (13:32). 
His  sinlessness  was  taken  for  granted ;  but  his  coming  to  John  for  baptism, 
his  temptation,  and  his  refusal  to  be  called  "good"  (10:18)  were  in  the 
tradition,  and  he  was  too  true  to  what  he  had  received  about  Jesus  to 
eliminate  it  all  in  favor  of  his  Christology.  For  Mark  as  for  Paul  every- 
thing culminates  in  the  death  of  Christ  (2:20;  8:31-33;  10:42-45;  14: 
22-24).  Large  space  is  given  to  the  closing  days.  The  death  is  of  sacri- 
ficial, atoning  significance.  The  Last  Supper  is  a  Christian  passover. 
Of  course  Mark  does  not  attempt  to  interpret  it  theologically  as  does  Paul, 
and  that  for  two  reasons:  he  is  writing  a  narrative  and  is  loyal  to  the 
tradition,  and  secondly,  the  generation  following  Paul  \aewed  Christianity 
in  a  simpler  way  than  the  apostle  did. 

Summing  up,  we  may  say  that  Mark's  sources  represent  Jesus  as  a 
preacher  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  calling  sinners  to  repentance;  a  Prophet 
and  Teacher,  superior  to  the  scribes,  speaking  with  authority,  his  utter- 
ances carrying  weight;  one  who  on  the  authority  of  God  wrought  miracles 
of  healing  (1:14,  22;  4:1-20;  6:4);  also  as  the  Messiah  who  will  come 
again  in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with  the  holy  angels  (8:38).  But  Mark's 
own  christological  standpoint  is  that  of  the  age  succeeding  Paul:  for  him 
Jesus  Christ  was  the  eternal  Son  of  God,  who  alone  had  the  right  on  earth 
to  forgive  sins  (2:7,  10). 

LUKE-ACTS 

It  is  generally  recognized,  that  Luke  and  Acts  have  the  same  author  and 
are  in  a  way  parts  of  the  same  work.  The  preface  to  Luke,  written  in 
characteristic  literary  form,  marks  the  author  as  a  man  of  culture.  He  was 
probably  a  convert  from  heathenism,  and  had  little  personal  acquaintance 
with  the  scenes  of  the  Lord's  life.  He  was  no  theologian,  but  was  possessed 
of  good  historical  taste  and  feeling.  The  Jewish  war  and  the  siege  and 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  are  described  in  more  vivid  and  detailed  prophecies 
than  in  Mark  and  Matthew  (Mark  19:42-44;  21:20-24).  The  descrip- 
tion of  the  persecution  of  Christians  is  also  striking  (Luke  6:22).  It  has  been 
more  frequently  thought  that  Luke  was  later  than  Matthew,  but  decisive 
evidence  is  wanting.  Both  gospels  were  probably  written  about  the  same 
time  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  century.  The  closing  of  Acts  without 
mentioning  the  death  of  Paul  is  not  conclusive  for  an  early  date.  It  is 
not  likely  that  the  end  of  the  book  has  been  lost,  but  when  we  consider 
the  writer's  apologetic  purpose,  the  freedom  accorded  the  apostle  though  a 

56 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRlSTOLOGY  57 

prisoner  seems  a  more  fitting  close  than  his  condemnation  to  death.     Acts 
was  probably  written  after  the  persecution  of  Domitian. 

The  Gospel  of  Luke  was  composed  in  an  environment  of  Greek  culture, 
and,  addressed  to  "most  excellent  Theophilus"  (/cpaTio-Te  ©coK^iXe),  was 
designed  to  inform  persons  of  social  standing,  doubtless  non-Christians, 
about  the  origin  and  character  of  the  Christian  movement.  The  author's 
own  Christology  is  not  brought  to  the  front.  The  speech-material  which 
he  uses  in  common  with  Matthew  strengthens  the  Markan  impression  of 
Jesus  as  a  great  prophetic  personality  dependent  on  God.  Luke  has  sub- 
ordinated doctrinal  interests.  He  delights  in  the  parables  of  Jesus.  The 
comprehensive  sympathy  of  Jesus  is  brought  out  in  his  conversation  with 
sinners,  Samaritans,  and  women.  He  has  contributed  one  new  miracle: 
the  raising  of  the  young  man  at  Nain.  The  great  christological  contribu- 
tion he  shares  with  Matthew:  that  of  the  virgin-birth.  Both  Luke  and 
Matthew  attempt  to  show  that  Jesus  was  David's  son  by  means  of  gene- 
alogies, which  do  not  agree  with  one  another  (Luke  3 :  23-38;  Matt,  i :  1-17), 
and  the  result  does  not  harmonize  with  the  miraculous  birth.  The  first 
chapters  of  Luke  have  strong  Semitic  coloring  and  came  from  Jewish- 
Christian  sources.  The  beautiful  Palestinian  hymns  and  the  primitive 
descriptions  of  the  Messiah  are  especially  to  be  noted  (Luke  1:32;  2:4, 
11).  The  Semitic  setting  suggests  that  the  conception  of  the  virgin-birth 
was  of  Palestinian  origin.  Its  christological  significance  is  that  it  furnished 
a  way  of  accounting  for  the  divine  personality  of  Jesus.  The  agency  of  the 
Spirit  under  such  circumstances  was  not  unfamiliar  to  Hebrew  thought.^ 
The  incidents  related  in  these  opening  chapters  of  Luke  are  closely  related 
to  Old  Testament  stories.  As  for  the  Greeks,  they  were  accustomed  to 
think  of  men  of  unusual  gifts  as  sons  of  gods  with  a  human  mother.' 
Of  course  with  their  exalted  ethical  conception  of  God  derived  from  the 
prophets  and  from  Jesus  himself  Christians  could  not  think  in  the  realistic 
forms  of  the  Greeks,  and  hence  the  holy  conception  was  spoken  of  in  terms 
of  awe  and  mystery:  "The  Holy  Spirit  shall  come  upon  thee  and  the  power 

I  Paul  speaks  of  Isaac  as  born  after  the  Spirit  (Gal.  4:  29;  Rom.  4: 16-21).  Job 
claims  to  have  been  the  helper  of  the  poor,  the  widow,  and  the  fatherless,  from  his 
mother's  womb  (31:16-18).  Unusual  circumstances  are  connected  with  the  births 
of  Isaac,  Samson,  and  Samuel.  This  is  especially  true  of  John  the  Baptist,  who  was 
"filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit  even  from  his  mother's  wornb"  (Luke  1:15).  In  the 
Gospel  according  to  the  Hebrews  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  in  Hebrew  is  a  feminine  noun, 
is  represented  as  the  mother  of  Jesus:  v  t^-^T^P  y^v  rb  ^lov  irvevixa.  (Quoted  by 
Origen,  Comm.  on  John  2:6;  in  Homil.  on  Jer.  15:4;  by  Jerome  on  Isa.  40: 13;  Ezek. 
16:13;  Mic.  7:6.) 

'  See  for  examples  Pfleiderer,  The  Early  Christian  Conception  0/ Christ,  pp.  33-45. 

57 


58  HISTORICAL   AND   LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

of  the  Highest  shall  overshadow  thee;  wherefore  also  that  which  is  born 
shall  be  called  holy,  Son  of  God"  (Luke  i  :35). 

The  Book  of  Acts  is  the  longest  work  in  the  New  Testament,  but  it 
does  not  furnish  us  with  much  material  for  determining  the  author's  own 
christological  standpoint.  Its  object  is  to  give  information  concerning 
the  introduction  of  Christianity  into  the  gentile  world  and  concerning 
the  relation  of  Christianity  to  the  Jewish  rehgion  and  to  the  Roman  state, 
and  it  treats  of  events  of  an  outward  nature.  It  was  the  first  generation 
that  fulfilled  the  task  of  introducing  Christianity  into  the  world  at  large 
and  diffusing  it  over  the  earth,  and  although  some  time  separates  the  author 
from  the  first  generation,  he  chooses  that  through  which  to  give  his  message. 
The  Book  of  Acts  is  best  understood  as  one  of  the  earUest  of  our  great  Chris- 
tian apologies;  it  has  the  leading  features  of  those  that  began  to  flourish 
about  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  Christianity  is  the  worship  of  one 
God,  Creator,  and  Ruler  of  the  world  revealed  to  men  by  Christ;  it  is 
accepting  Jesus  as  the  Christ,  proved  such  by  the  resurrection,  and  belie%ang 
in  the  coming  judgment  and  resurrection  and  living  a  holy  life.  The 
author  would  prove  to  the  Roman  power  and  the  heathen  world  of  culture 
that  Christianity  is  the  true  religion:  the  fulfilment  of  revealed  religion  in 
Judaism,  at  one  with  the  wisdom  of  the  Greeks — worthy  of  tolerance  and 
recognition  by  the  state  in  view  of  the  blameless  lives  of  its  adherents. 
Its  extension  is  in  accordance  with  God's  will  and  without  danger  to  the 
state.  Thus  the  problem  of  the  relation  of  Christians  to  the  state  taken 
up  by  Paul  in  Rom.  13:1-7,  resumed  in  I  Pet.  2:13-17,  again  receives 
attention.  The  early  speeches  of  Acts  are  apologies  for  the  Christian 
brotherhood  and  its  missionary  activities  and  the  later  speeches  of  Paul 
are  further  apologies  for  Christianity  and  its  extension  among  the  gentiles. 
The  attitude  of  the  civil  authorities  toward  charges  brought  against  Chris- 
tians receives  special  attention,  the  Christians  always  being  found  innocent: 
at  Philippi  (16:20-40),  at  Thessalonica  (17:6-9),  at  Corinth  (18:12-17), 
and  at  Ephesus  (19:23-40). 

Thus  we  see  that  the  general  purpose  of  Luke  and  Acts  is  the  same, 
and  the  Christology  is  that  of  the  third  generation. 

MATTHEW 

The  Gospel  of  Matthew  is  a  doctrinal  work,  representing  an  advanced 
stage  of  Christology.  The  author  was  a  Christian  Jew,  possibly  of  Pales- 
tine, who  knew  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament.  He  was,  however,  not  a 
particularist — did  not  belong  to  the  Jewish-Christian  party,  but  to  the 
church  universal.     He   was  free   from   Jewish  law  and  prejudice,    and 

58 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHEISTOLOGY  59 

wherever  his  own  thought  shows  itself,  his  Christology  finds  splendid 
universalistic  expression.  He  represents  the  spirit  of  the  developing 
church.  He  is  a  teacher  and  an  artist.  Mark's  order  is  in  general  chrono- 
logical, his  topical.  Lacking  the  picture-painting  power  of  Mark  and 
the  poetic  genius  of  Luke,  he  arranges  his  material  according  to  numerical 
system.  He  presents  not  a  portrait  but  an  argument.  He  is  perhaps 
more  akin  to  John  than  to  Mark. 

We  may  say  that  his  primary  purpose  is  to  establish  the  messiahship 
of  Jesus  by  showing  how  from  birth  to  ascension  he  fulfilled  the  messianic 
requirements;  lineage,  birthplace,  manner  of  birth,  the  events  of  his  life, 
his  death  and  resurrection,  all  pointing  in  the  same  direction.  The  con- 
formity of  Old  Testament  prophecies  concerning  the  Christ  with  the  life 
of  Jesus  is  demonstrated.  He  is  Messiah,  Son  of  David,  King  of  the  Jews, 
Immanuel,  Son  of  man.  Son  of  God,  Teacher,  Lord.  But  although  the 
gospel  was  written  to  prove  that  Jesus  bore  the  messianic  character,  such 
must  not  be  understood  in  the  older  national  sense.  Matthew  treads  the 
path  that  leads  to  Catholicism.  Jesus  is  the  Savior  of  the  world,  and  from 
beginning  to  close  it  is  the  author's  own  conviction  that  the  gospel  is  intended 
for  all  nations  (2:1-12;  28:19,  20).  Either  the  date  of  Matthew  is  quite 
late,  or  else  our  author  has  anticipated  ecclesiastical  developments  in  a 
remarkable  manner:  witness  the  advanced  recognition  of  the  authority 
of  the  apostles  and  of  the  church  (16:18,  19;  18:15-20)  and  the  developed 
baptismal  formula.  Christianity  is  a  new  spiritual  law  and  Christ  one 
who  gives  commandments  (see  especially  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and 
the  Great  Commission).  In  these  directions  the  church  was  in  a  degree 
getting  away  from  Paul. 

Three  points  may  be  especially  noted:  the  heightening  of  the  evangelic 
tradition,  the  place  of  the  sacrificial  death,  and  the  eschatology. 

I.  Matthew's  transformation  of  the  evangelic  tradition  in  favor  of 
his  own  Christology  reminds  us  of  the  Gospel  of  John.  One  has  only  to 
set  before  him  side  by  side  Matthew  where  he  follows  Mark  and  Mark  to 
behold  the  inner  workings  of  Matthew's  own  mind.  It  is  not  enough 
that  Jesus  cast  out  demons  by  the  Spirit  of  God  (i  2 :  28),  performed  miracles 
of  healing,  raised  the  dead  to  life,  walked  on  the  water,  and  on  two  occasions 
fed  the  multitudes  with  a  few  loaves  and  fishes.  Miracles  where  cure  is 
effected  by  physical  means  must  be  omitted;  he  heals*with  a  word  (8:8,  16). 
Miracle  must  be  immediate:  the  disciples  marveled,  saying:  "How  did 
the  fig-tree  immediately  wither  away  ?"  (21 :  20).  The  scope  of  the  healings 
must  be  made  universal:  "all"  instead  of  "many."  Human  emotion, 
inability,  desire  unfulfilled,  and  the  asking  of  questions  must  not  be  ascribed 

59 


60  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

to  Jesus  if  there  is  a  way  of  escape.  In  other  words,  Mark's  defects  must 
be  corrected.  The  difficulty  in  Mark's  account  of  the  baptism  of  Jesus 
must  be  removed.^ 

2.  The  Pauline  doctrine  of  the  death  of  Christ  as  a  sacrifice  which 
propitiates  God  and  does  away  with  the  necessity  for  further  sacrifices  is 
taught:  "This  is  my  blood  of  the  new  covenant  which  is  shed  for  many 
for  remission  of  sins"   (26:28). 

3.  The  striking  feature  of  the  eschatology  is  the  prominent  place  given 
to  the  Son  of  man  as  Judge.  He  shall  send  forth  his  angels  for  judgment 
and  to  gather  together  his  elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  the  uttermost 
bounds  of  the  heavens  (13:41-43;  24:31).  In  the  regeneration  the  Son 
of  man  shall  sit  on  the  throne  of  his  glory  and  shall  render  to  every  man 
according  to  his  deeds  (16:27;  19:28;  25:31-46).  Even  in  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount  he  is  presented  in  this  capacity  (7 :  21). 

1  In  his  Cofnmentary  on  Matthew,  Allen  gives  a  full  list  of  passages  where  the 
heightened  Christology  appears — pp.  xxxi-xxxiii.  He  gives  a  good  summary  of  Mat- 
thew's Christologj',  pp.  Ixvi,  Ixvii. 


60 


VI.     CHRISTOLOGY    OF    THE    EPISTLES    TO    THE  COLOS- 

SIANS   AND   THE  EPHESIANS:    COSMOLOGICAL 

CHRISTOLOGY 

If  the  epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  the  Ephesians  were  written  by- 
Paul,  they  mark  an  advance  upon  the  conception  of  Christ  found  in  his 
other  epistles.  Inasmuch  as  the  Christology  is  distinct  and  more  highly 
developed,  it  is  here  treated  apart  from  the  PauUne  Christology,  with 
which  are  its  closest  affinities,  the  question  of  the  possibility  of  Pauline 
authorship  being  left  an  open  one.  If  Paul  was  not  the  author,  no  early 
Christian  known  to  us  stood  so  near  to  him  as  the  writer  or  writers  of 
these  epistles.  It  is  possible,  but  not  likely,  that  Colossians  and  Ephesians 
have  the  same  author.  Akin  to  Hebrews,  they  stand  between  the  Pauline 
and  the  Johannine  Christology,  representing  an  interpretation  of  Christ 
that  may  be  called  cosmological. 

COLOSSIANS 

A  better  case  can  be  made  out  for  the  Pauline  authorship  of  Colossians 
than  of  Ephesians.  Colossians  probably  has  as  its  basis  a  genuine  work 
of  Paul,  which  has  been  worked  over  or  interpolated.  For  example,  the 
description  of  the  work  of  redemption  perfected  in  Christ  in  i :  15-20  may 
be  a  later  amplification.  Three  influences  upon  the  christological  thought 
may  be  discussed. 

1.  Paidinism. — The  genuine  Paulinism  underlying  and  pervading 
the  epistle  is  too  thoroughgoing  to  require  enumeration  of  details.  If  this 
is  not  directly  due  to  Paul  himself  as  the  author,  it  is  remarkable  in  view 
of  the  fact  that  in  general  he  was  little  understood.  But  the  thought  of 
Christ  is  carried  a  stage  farther.  In  I  Cor.  8 : 6  Paul  intimates  that  Christ 
is  the  agent  in  creation,  but  in  Col.  i  :i6,  17  he  is  set  forth  as  the  author, 
ground,  and  end — a  relation  which  in  Paul's  thought  belongs  to  God 
(I  Cor.  15:28;  Rom.  11:33-36).  In  Paul's  teaching  the  reconciUng 
death  of  Christ  was  for  the  benefit  of  men,  with  whom  Christ  identified 
himself,  and  not  for  the  world  of  spirits  (II  Cor.  5:18-21;  Rom.  8:3); 
but  in  Col.  1 :  20  the  thought  is  that  Christ's  death  has  universal  cosmic 
effects,  reconciling  things  on  the  earth  and  things  in«the  heavens. 

2.  Alexandrianism. — It  appears  that  the  Colossian  Christians  were 
for  the  most  part  gentiles,  among  whom  an  ascetic  and  legalistic  tendency 
had  appeared,  not  without  a  decided  Jewish  color.  But  the  trouble  was 
not  due  to  the  influence  of  the  Judaizers  who  were  a  source  of  annoyance 
61]  61 


62  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

to  Paul,  for  the  question  is  not  one  of  circumcision  or  the  observance  of 
Jewish  law  or  hostility  to  Paul's  authority.  These  errorists  did  not  preach 
another  gospel,  like  the  anathematized  Judaizers  in  Galatia,  but  only  an 
alleged  higher  stage  of  perfection.  They  represented  not  Palestinian 
Judaism,  but  the  freer,  more  speculative  kind  prevailing  at  Alexandria, 
which  made  itself  felt  in  the  world  at  large  and  especially  in  Asia  Minor. 

Now  the  author  meets  those  who  make  pretensions  to  philosophy 
and  wisdom  on  their  own  ground  (2:8,  23).  In  the  spirit  of  the  Alexan- 
drian who  wrote  Hebrews  he  applies  to  Christ  language  that  Philo  used 
of  the  Logos.  When  he  says  that  Christ  is  an  eiKwv  tov  ©eoC  tov  aopdrov 
(1:15),  he  recalls  the  language  of  Paul  in  II  Cor.  4:4,  but  also  the  thought 
of  Philo  that  the  God  who  hides  himself  is  revealed  through  the  Logos, 
who  mediates  the  relations  of  God  to  the  world.  Like  the  Logos,  Christ 
is  the  immanent  cosmic  principle.  Philo  says  that  the  incorporeal  cosmos 
has  its  seat  in  the  divine  Logos,  the  cosmos  perceptible  by  the  external 
senses  being  made  on  the  model  of  it;i  that  the  Logos  of  the*OvTos  being 
the  bond  of  everything  holds  together  (orwe'xei)  and  grasps  all  the  parts, 
and  prevents  them  from  being  loosened  ;2  that  the  Logos  holds  together 
and  regulates  the  whole. 3  In  Col.  i :  17  it  is  said  that  in  Christ  all  things 
hold  together  {crwea-TrjKev) .  Philo  called  the  Logos  the  firstborn  and 
oldest  Son  of  God;  in  Col.  1:15  Christ  is  said  to  be  the  firstborn  of  all 
creation,  and  in  Col.  1:18  the  firstborn  from  the  dead,  recalUng  also  the 
"firstborn  among  many  brethren"  of  Rom.  8:29  and  "the  firstborn"  of 
Heb.  1 : 6.     Thus  Christ  is  made  the  center  of  cosmology. 

3.  Gnosticism. — It  was  largely  under  the  pressure  of  the  gnostic  con- 
troversy of  the  second  century  that  out  of  the  scattered  Christian  com- 
munities of  the  period  of  which  we  write  the  Catholic  church  was  organized, 
with  its  settled  order  of  government  and  worship,  its  formulated  creed,  and 
its  New  Testament  canon;  and  it  is  not  customary  to  speak  of  Gnosticism 
as  existing  at  the  time  when  these  epistles  were  written.  But  long  before  the 
great  gnostic  systems  had  been  elaborated  the  movement  had  begun  and 
had  excited  the  suspicion  of  church-leaders.  Its  origin  was  in  the  aspira- 
tions after  deliverance  from  the  bondage  of  the  flesh  and  the  earth  on  the 
part  of  an  age  which,  having  outgrown  the  popular  religion,  attempted 
the  construction  of  something  more  satisfying  in  the  union  of  oriental  myth 
and  Greek  philosophy.  Eclectic  in  spirit,  it  welcomed  help  from  any 
source,  not  rejecting  apocalyptic  and  Philonic  Judaism;  but  when  it 
came  into  contact  with  the  powerful,  vital  Christian  movement,  which 

I  De  Mundi  Opt/.  10. 

»  De  Prqfug.  20.  3  De  Vita  Mosis  3 :  14. 

62 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  63 

offered  the  very  redemption  for  which  it  sought,  it  had  to  take  a  subordinate 
place. 

Though  later  counted  a  heresy,  incipient  Gnosticism  at  first  represented 
a  tendency  and  movement  v^^ithin  Christianity.  In  presenting  Christianity 
to  the  Hellenic  world  Paul  spoke  of  the  gospel  in  terms  of  knowledge  and 
mystery,  and  distinguished  grades  of  initiation.  He  intimated  that  for 
more  advanced,  spiritual  Christians  he  had  a  higher  doctrine  (I  Cor., 
chap.  3).  His  sharp  antithesis  of  flesh  and  spirit  was  in  line  with  tendencies 
in  the  Greek  world.  He  found  it  necessary  to  divert  the  emphasis  of  his 
teaching  at  Corinth  from  the  speculative  side.  So  the  errorists  at  Colossae 
were  not  counted  out  of  the  fold  as  having  denied  Christ,  but  they  were 
losing  their  hold  on  him  (2:19).  Prayer  was  made  for  the  Colossian 
Christians  that  they  might  be  filled  not  with  speculative,  but  practical 
knowledge — the  knowledge  of  God's  will  (1:9). 

The  writer's  conception  of  Christ  takes  the  form  given  it  by  gnostic 
thought.  To  what  extent  gnostic  speculation  had  developed  at  this  time 
cannot  be  said,  but  at  least  at  a  somewhat  later  period  the  Gnostics  looked 
upon  the  work  of  Jesus  as  but  an  aspect  of  a  magnificent  cosmical  process, 
in  which  he  was  united  with  an  Aeon  from  the  supernal  world.  It  is  against 
some  such  teaching  that  our  author  magnifies  the  dignity  of  Christ's  person 
and  the  completeness  of  his  redemptive  work.  He  is  not  an  Aeon  of  the 
Pleroma,  but  in  him  dwells  in  bodily  form  all  the  fulness  (TrXrjpwfxa)  of 
deity.  He  is  superior  to  and  sovereign  over  all  the  visible  and  invisible 
forces  of  the  universe.  Having  rid  himself  of  the  principalities  and  the 
powers,  he  held  them  up  to  open  contempt  when  he  triumphed  over  them 
on  the  cross  (2:15).  By  his  death  all  things  in  earth  and  heaven  were 
reconciled  to  God,  so  that  no  place  is  left  for  the  intermediate  agencies  of 
Gnosticism.  What  was  sought  in  the  doctrine  of  the  Pleroma  was  to  be 
found  in  Christ  (2:3),  fellowship  with  whom  meant  participation  in  the 
divine  life.  In  spite  of  its  pretensions  to  spirituaUty,  the  new  teaching  was 
materialistic. — according  to  the  rudiments  of  the  world  (2:8). 

EPHESIANS 

The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  is  certainly  no  letter  of  the  apostle  Paul 
to  the  church  at  Ephesus,  with  which  he  had  had  such  intimate  relations 
(1:15;  3 : 2-4).  The  words  eV  'E<^€cra)  (1:1)  are  even  textually  suspicious,^ 
Marcion    having    read  in  his  copy   iv  AaoStKeta.     It  may  have  been  a 

■  N  has  iv  'E^^av  only  from  the  hand  of  a  later  corrector.  B  has  the  words  only  in 
the  margin  and  not  from  the  first  hand.  Church  Fathers  bear  witness  against  any 
indication  of  place  in  this  passage  according  to  certain  early  manuscripts  with  which 
they  were  familiar. 

63 


64  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

circular  letter  addressed  by  Paul  to  a  definite  circle  of  churches  (1:15; 
3:18;  6:18,  21,  22).  But  while  there  is  ample  genuine  Paulinism,  the 
long,  intricate  sentences  do  not  seem  to  have  come  from  his  hand,  and  as 
in  Colossians,  Pauline  ideas  are  pushed  farther.  Echoes  of  the  Pauline 
epistles  appear  everywhere;  Ephesians  is  Hke  an  elaborated  mosaic.  The 
style  is  elevated  and  almost  lyrical,  some  passages  sounding  like  bits  of 
liturgy.  It  is  a  hymn  of  love  and  peace  and  unity,  and  its  theme  is  Christ 
and  the  church.  The  statement  that  the  church  is  built  upon  the  foun- 
dation of  the  apostles  and  prophets  (2:20),  and  the  reference  to  Christ's 
holy  apostles  and  prophets  as  the  recipients  of  the  revelation  of  the 
mystery  of  Christ  (3:5),  suggest  an  age  considerably  beyond  that  of 
Paul.  Apparently  the  first  epistle  of  Peter  had  reached  Asia  Minor  and 
was  known  to  the  author. 

The  relationship  between  this  epistle  and  Colossians  is  certainly  close. 
The  Christology  of  Ephesians  does  not  go  beyond  that  of  Colossians. 
There  is  in  the  background  the  same  syncretism  of  oriental  theosophy 
and  Christian  faith  which  characterized  gnostic  systems  and  influenced 
even  the  church  conceptions,  though  the  form  of  error  here  is  libertinism 
instead  of  asceticism.  Influenced  indeed  by  these  speculations,  both  epistles 
combat  the  errors  from  the  standpoint  of  the  church  in  the  name  of  the 
apostle  Paul.  It  would  seem  that  in  thought  and  place  of  origin  they 
stand  near  the  Ignatian  and  Johannine  writings,  although  removed  per- 
haps in  time.  Profound  thought  is  the  weapon  used  against  error,  and 
not  as  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles  ecclesiastical  authority  and  tradition.  But 
in  Ephesians  there  is  a  certain  elevation  above  the  concrete;  contradictions 
have  been  abolished  in  Christ,  and  the  strife  and  confusions  of  earth  are 
harmonized  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  A  new  humanity  rises  in  which 
the  enmity  that  divided  the  old  humanity  into  two  hostile  camps  of  Jew 
and  gentile  has  been  abolished.  When  Christ  Jesus  reconciled  men  to 
God  he  did  away  with  the  Jewish  law  that  separated  men  from  each  other 
(2:13-16).  This  amalgamation  of  humanity  into  a  new  man,  a  new 
social  fellowship,  that  is,  the  church,  the  mystical  body  of  Christ,  in  which 
has  been  abolished  the  national  and  ceremonial  particularism  of  Judaism 
so  that  the  heathen  who  were  once  far  off  are  taken  up  into  the  covenant- 
relationship  of  the  Old  Testament  church  and  all  have  access  in  one  Spirit 
to  the  Father,  rests  upon  the  foreordaining  counsel  of  God  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world  (i  14,  5,  11).  But  for  the  present  the  church  must 
wage  a  conflict  with  the  spiritual  powers  of  the  world  and  make  known  to 
the  principalities  and  the  powers  in  the  heavenlies  the  manifold  wisdom  of 
God  (3: 10;   6:10-18). 

64 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHBISTOLOGY  65 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  Colossians  is  cosmologically  and  we  might 
almost  say  metaphysically  christological,  while  Ephesians  is  ecclesiastically 
and  soteriologically  christological.  The  conception  of  the  church  as  the 
body  of  Christ  contained  implicitly  in  Rom.  12 :4,  5  and  explicitly  in  I  Cor. 
12:12-30,  found  also  in  Col.  1:18,  24;  2:19,  comes  here  into  the  fore- 
ground. It  is  not  a  local  society,  but  the  church  universal — a  conception 
not  wanting  in  Paul  (I  Cor.  10:32;  12:28;  15:9).  It  is  the  object  of 
Christ's  love  (5:25-32). 

There  is,  as  in  Colossians,  the  effort  to  set  over  against  the  false  and 
destructive  Gnosis  which  did  not  rightly  apprehend  and  value  the  Christian 
redemption  th£  true  Gnosis  of  Christ  and  his  redemptive  work.  The 
gospel-mystery,  at  first  hidden  but  now  revealed  to  apostles  and  prophets 
and  proclaimed  to  all,  consists  of  God's  love  for  the  world,  his  revelation 
in  Christ,  and  the  inclusion  of  the  gentiles  as  fellow-heirs  and  fellow- 
members  of  the  body  and  fellow-partakers  of  the  promise  in  Christ  Jesus 
(3:4-6).  The  emphasis  is  transferred  from  knowledge  to  ethics.  The 
higher  knowledge  is  morally  conditioned;  love  is  the  central  virtue  and 
energy.  The  Pleroma  of  Col.  1:19  and  2 : 9  is  here  introduced  in  connection 
with  the  church  (1:23). 

But  while  the  practical  and  religious  interest  is  dominant,  the  speculative 
side  is  not  wanting.  The  creation  of  the  world  by  Christ  is  not  directly 
stated,  God  being  designated  as  the  Creator  of  all  things  in  3:9,  but  Christ 
is  set  forth  as  the  cosmical  principle  of  unity.  As  in  Col.  i  :i6,  17  Christ 
appears  as  not  only  the  mediator,  but  also  the  goal  of  creation,  in  whom 
all  things  find  consistency,  so  in  Eph.  1:10  ^11  things  in  the  heavens  and 
on  the  earth  are  summed  up  (dvaKcc^aXatwo-ao-^at)  in  Christ,  and  in 
1 :  23  he  is  said  to  fill  all  in  all.  Christ  seems  to  be  thought  of  not  merely 
as  an  individual  person,  but  in  some  way  the  content  of  the  totality  of  the 
elect  (1:4;  2:21).  He  is  the  realization  of  the  plan  of  the  universe  that 
existed  in  the  counsel  of  God  from  all  eternity,  the  basis  of  a  unity  which 
will  embrace  the  whole  creation. 


65 


VII.     THE  CHRISTOLOGY  OF  THE  EPISTLE 
TO  THE  HEBREWS 

Theological  interpretations  of  Jesus  may  be  found  in  practically  all 
the  literature  of  primitive  Christianity,  l^ut  in  most  cases  it  is  only  the 
current  Christology  of  the  church  in  the  particular  period  and  region  to 
which  a  given  writing  belongs.  In  several  instances,  however,  the  Christol- 
ogy is  of  a  bold,  original,  and  individual  type,  notably  in  the  Pauline, 
Ignatian,  and  Johannine  writings.  To  the  former  class  belongs  the  First 
Epistle  of  Peter,  to  the  latter  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  The  writer  of 
Hebrews  is  no  mere  Pauhnist,  but  an  independent  Christian  thinker  worthy 
of  comparison  with  Paul,  Ignatius,  and  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
For  refinement,  culture,  precision,  elevated  and  finished  literar)^  style, 
combined  ^\^th  \dgorous  thought,  energetic  utterance,  moral  earnestness, 
and  practical  aim,  among  the  writers  of  primitive  Christianity  known  to 
us  he  stands  unique. 

The  epistle  is  a  word  of  exhortation  (6  Xoyos  t^s  TrapaKAi/o-ews,  13:22), 
addressed  with  extraordinary  dignity  and  eloquence  to  sluggish,  indifferent, 
and  wavering  Christians,  in  imminent  danger  of  faUing  away  from  their 
Christian  faith,  designed  to  arouse  them  to  a  sense  of  the  transcendent 
worth  and  sufficiency  of  the  Christian  revelation.  It  was  not  addressed 
TTpos  'EygpatOTs,  nor  to  Jewish  Christians  at  all,  but  to  Christians  in  general, 
to  a  Christian  community  where  race-distinctions  no  longer  obtained,  as 
was  the  case  in  most  of  the  churches  after  the  older  Jewish  controversies 
had  passed  away.  The  danger  is  not  that  of  a  reversion  to  Judaism,  but 
of  an  evil,  unbelieving  heart,  an  apostasy  from  the  living  God,  of  being 
carried  away  by  divers  and  strange  teachings  (3:12;  13:9).  Writer  and 
readers  belonged  to  the  second  generation;  they  were  not  among  those  who 
at  first  heard  the  words  spoken  through  the  Lord,  but  received  from  them 
the  word  (2:3).  Paul  on  the  other  hand  received  the  gospel  not  from  man, 
nor  was  he  taught  it,  but  directly  from  the  risen  Christ  (Gal.  1:12);  yet  he 
acknowledges  having  received  the  tradition  from  others  (I  Cor.  11:2,  23; 

15:3)- 

For  the  determination  of  date  and  destination  comparison  with  First 

Clement  (about  A.  D.  95)  is  instructive.     Its  extended  use  by  Clement 

is  unmistakable.     The  sudden  and  repeated  calamities  and  reverses  of 

I  Clem.  I :  I  in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Domitian  (81-96)  best  answer 

to  the  situation  reflected  in  Hebrews,  where  the  persons  addressed  are 

66]  66 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  67 

subject  to  persecution  or  have  the  near  prospect  of  it  (12:4-13;  13:3,  23). 
Domitian's  cruel  caprice  manifested  itself  after  the  revolt  of  Antoninus 
Saturninus  in  a.  d.  88,  the  famous  cases  of  Titus  Flavius  Clemens  and 
Flavia  Domitilla  coming  toward  the  close  of  his  reign.  His  persecution 
extended  to  Jews,  Christians,  and  noble  Romans.'  Hebrews  was  then 
written  late  in  Domitian's  reign,  shortly  before  First  Clement.  With  this 
agrees  the  reference  to  the  Neronian  persecution  of  A.  d.  64,  in  the  former 
days,  soon  after  their  acceptance  of  Christ,  when  they  endured  a  great 
conflict  of  sufferings  and  were  made  a  spectacle  (10:32,  33).  Clement 
makes  similar  reference  to  the  persecution  under  Nero  (chaps.  5,  6;  see  also 
Tacitus,  Annals,  15 :44).  In  addition  to  the  use  by  Clement,  the  references 
to  the  two  persecutions  (probably  that  under  Nero  was  local  only),  and  to 
former  great  leaders,  also  the  mention  of  Timothy's  release  and  the  salu- 
tations of  those  from  Italy  (13:23,  24),  if  genuine,  tend  to  confirm  the 
Roman  destination. 

The  author  was  a  literary  Hellenist,  familiar  with  Alexandrian  philosophy 
and  skilful  in  argumentation,  a  master  of  periodic  and  antithetical  Greek 
style.  This  type  of  academic  and  philosophic  Judaism  was  not,  however, 
confined  to  Alexandria.  His  treatment  of  Jewish  history  and  religion  gives 
the  impression  of  remoteness  and  detachment;  like  Philo  he  speaks  of  the 
tabernacle  and  not  of  the  temple,  his  source  of  information  being  the 
Pentateuch.  Like  Philo  he  represents  the  high  priest  as  offering  daily 
sacrifices  for  his  own  sins  and  the  sins  of  the  people  (7  :2'j),  but  elsewhere 
he  shows  that  he  is  aware  of  the  fact  that  it  was  yearly  (9:7,  25).  The 
altar  of  incense  is  placed  within  the  Most  Holy  Place  instead  of  in  the  Holy 
Place  (9:4).  Contemporary  ceremonial  Judaism  is  far  from  his  mind. 
The  attitude  of  Clement  of  Rome  is  very  much  the  same;  he  likewise 
disregards  the  fact  that  the  temple  has  been  destroyed  and  the  sacrifices 
are  no  longer  offered  (chap.  4).  Hebrews  makes  large  use  of  the  Greek 
Old  Testament;  the  canon  is  that  of  the  Septuagint  (note  Maccabean 
heroes  of  chap.  11).  Clement  makes  stiil  larger  use  of  the  Greek  Old 
Testament  Scriptures,  assuming  that  his  readers  knew  them  (chaps.  45,  53, 
62).  The  Old  Testament  constituted  the  only  authoritative  Scriptures  of  the 
Christians  themselves  at  this  time.  Clement,  probably  a  gentile  Chris- 
tian, writing  to  gentile  believers,  speaks  of  "our  father  Jacob,"  "our 
father  Abraham,"  and  calls  Old  Testament  worthies,  "our  fathers"  (4:7; 
31:2;  62:2;  cf.Heb.  1:1;   2:16). 

Relation  to  Paul. — The  dependence  of  Hebrews  upon  Paul  is  generally 

•  Compare  the  reference  to  confiscation  of  property  in  Hcb.   10:34  with  Dion 
Cassius,  Hist.  87 :  14. 

67 


68  HISTORICAL   AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

maintained,  but  it  is  not  so  easy  to  point  out  specifically  in  what  such  depend- 
ence consists.  Paul  so  influenced  the  Christian  movement  in  general  that 
it  would  have  been  something  different  had  he  not  come  into  contact  with 
it;  accordingly  no  Christian  writing  in  the  last  decade  of  the  first  century 
A.  D.  could  escape  his  indirect  influence.  In  the  case  of  First  Peter,  it  is 
not  diflncult  to  distinguish  the  PauUne  element.  In  Hebrews,  the  Philonic 
influence  is  evident.  Resemblances  to  Paul  in  Hebrews  there  are,  but 
evidence  of  direct  indebtedness  is  not  manifest.  The  pre-existence  of 
Christ  plays  a  part  in  Hebrews,  but  the  idea  of  pre-existence  belonged  to 
Jewish  messianism,  Hellenistic  Judaism,  and  pre-Pauline  Christianity  as 
well.  It  is  true  that  Paul  made  a  remarkable  ethical  and  religious  use  of 
the  conception  that  was  unique,  and  at  this  point  the  writer  of  Hebrews 
was  doubtless — in  common  with  others — his  debtor.  Perhaps  Pauline 
influence  may  be  looked  for  with  more  confidence  in  the  connection  of  the 
remission  of  sins  wdth  the  death  of  Christ,  and  this  doctrine  upon  which 
Paul  laid  great  emphasis  is  certainly  present  in  Hebrews;  yet  the  point  of 
view  is  different.  Taking  his  words  at  their  face  value,  Paul  teaches  that 
Christ  bore  the  curse  of  the  law  as  the  representative  of  sinful  humanity, 
receiving  in  himself  the  judgment  of  death.  The  satisfaction  of  the  law 
or  of  the  divine  righteousness  in  the  death  of  Christ  is  not  brought  to  the 
front  in  Hebrews.  Paul  thought  in  terms  of  Pharisaic  theology;  the 
writer  of  Hebrews  thought  of  the  Old  Testament  offerings.  Through 
suffering  and  death  Christ  became  a  Savior  (2:14-18;  10:5-10);  he  is 
the  high  priest  who  offers  his  life  in  obedience  and  patience,  to  cleanse  the 
hearts  of  men.  Answering  to  the  Pauline  doing-away  vrith  the  curse  of 
the  law,  there  is  in  one  passage  in  Hebrews  the  destruction  of  him  who 
has  the  power  of  death,  so  as  to  free  those  who  are  in  lifelong  bondage  and 
fear  (2:14,  15).  For  the  almost  personified  law  of  Paul  is  here  substituted 
the  devil,  who  is  not  represented  as  satisfied  by  a  ransom,  but  as  in  some 
way  overcome  by  Christ's  sacrificial  death. 

It  is  only  on  the  surface  that  the  epistle  is  seen  to  take  up  the  argument 
against  Judaism  on  the  lines  of  Paul;  the  standpoint  is  different.  The 
conclusions  of  Paul  are  assumed;  they  had  already  prevailed.  Christianity 
had  been  severed  from  the  Jewish  law,  and  was  recognized  as  a  new  religion 
with  a  new  principle.  Of  course  in  a  deeper  sense  the  battle  against  every 
kind  of  legalism  had  not  been  fought  to  a  finish;  in  this  most  of  Paul's 
followers  failed  to  catch  the  full  import  of  his  doctrine.  His  conception 
of  Christian  freedom  from  the  flesh  and  the  law,  effected  by  oneness  with 
Christ  in  his  death  and  resurrection,  does  not  appear  in  this  epistle;  an 
approach  to  this  is  seen  in  the  proposition  that  believers  are  partakers 

68 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  69 

of  Christ  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit  (/AcVoxot  tov  ypia-rov,  3:14;  6:4).  In 
the  first  instance  the  relationship  is  that  to  a  leader  or  elder  brother,  and 
probably  not  that  of  mystic  union:  partners  of  Christ.  For  Paul  faith 
meant  life-union  with  Christ;  in  Hebrews  it  is  akin  to  obedience,  fidelity, 
heroism,  and  belief  in  the  unseen. 

To  the  Jew  the  ritual  side  of  his  religion  was  of  subordinate  interest. 
Judaism  was  able  to  survive  the  destruction  of  its  temple  and  holy  city  in 
A.  D.  70.  So  Hebrews  is  not  concerned  with  the  temple,  but  the  tabernacle. 
Paul  was  interested  in  neither;  passing  by  the  temple  and  external  worship 
of  Judaism  he  fixed  his  attention  upon  its  very  heart — the  law.  Now  for 
the  purpose  of  his  argument  the  author  of  Hebrews  finds  the  soul  of  Old 
Testament  religion  in  the  priestly  cultus.  He  is  not  engaged  in  the  old 
Pauline  conflict  with  the  Judaizers,  nor  is  he  even  making  a  plea  primarily 
for  Christianity  against  Judaism;  rather  it  is  his  effort  to  set  forth  Chris- 
tianity as  the  perfect,  eternal  religion,  better  at  every  point  than  the  only 
pre-Christian  and  non-Christian  religion  worthy  of  consideration  in  com- 
parison, one  based  on  a  real  revelation.  Paul  considers  the  law  in  relation 
to  justifying  faith  in  Christ ;  Hebrews  in  relation  to  the  perfection  of  Christ's 
sacrifice.  For  Paul  the  law  is  weak  only  through  the  flesh — through  its 
incapacity  to  enable  a  man  to  obey  the  will  of  God  (Rom.  8:2);  it  cannot 
save  because  man  is  morally  impotent  to  keep  it.  The  ofl&ce  of  the  law  is 
to  deepen  the  consciousness  of  sin  and  to  make  transgressions  abound. 
On  the  other  han^,  viewing  it  in  its  ceremonial  aspects  Hebrews  considers 
it  carnal  (7:16;  9: 10),  its  failure  being  due  to  the  fact  that  animal  sacrifices 
cannot  cleanse  the  conscience.  Judaism's  partial  truth  is  perceived,  as  a 
system  of  types  and  symbols  foreshadowing  the  reality  in  Christ.  The 
law  and  the  gospel  are  shadow  and  substance. 

Generally,  the  emphasis  in  Hebrews  is  different  from  that  in  the  epistles 
of  Paul.  It  is  notable  that  Paul  was  not  able  to  find  so  great  a  value  in  the 
earthly  life  and  experiences  of  Jesus  as  our  author  finds.  His  present 
activity  in  our  behalf  is  differently  represented.  To  be  sure  Paul  does  in 
one  instance  describe  Christ  as  the  intercessor  in  heaven  on  our  behalf 
(Rom.  8:34).  Only  in  one  passage  is  there  reference  to  the  resurrection 
of  Christ  in  Hebrews  (13:20). 

Relation  to  Philo. — The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  is  a  Christian  work 
written  from  the  standpoint  of  philosophic  Judaism.  We  have  noted  the 
absence  of  direct  dependence  on  Paul;  very  different  is  the  relation  to  the 
Book  of  Wisdom  and  to  Philo.  Doubtless  the  author  had  felt  the  influence 
of  Philo  before  his  conversion  to  Christianity.  His  allegorizing  exegesis 
discloses  his  Alexandrian  education.     The  allegorical  interpretation  was 

69 


70  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

indeed  current  in  rabbinic  circles  of  Palestine,  but  this  author's  method  is 
that  of  Philo — employing  historical  characters,  institutions,  and  events  as 
symbols  of  spiritual  realities.  Points  of  contact  with  Philo  are  found 
almost  everywhere,  and  the  conclusion  is  irresistible  that  often  there  are 
genuine  echoes.  To  be  sure  our  author  is  more  temperate  than  Philo 
in  allegorizing  the  Old  Testament.  Even  the  more  striking  resemblances 
are  too  numerous  to  exhibit  here;  the  reader  is  referred  for  details  to 
Siegfried,  Philo  von  Alexandria,  S.  321-30. 

It  would  have  been  strange  had  our  author  not  employed  the  Logos-con- 
ception of  Philo.  The  fact  is  that  he  uses  it  on  a  far  larger  scale  than  does 
the  writer  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  only  he  does  not  take  over  the  word; 
another  title  used  by  Philo  of  the  Logos  was  already  in  Christian  use  and 
served  his  purposes  better — the  Son  of  God.  The  striking  designations 
of  Christ  and  the  functions  attributed  to  him  in  Heb.  i  :2,  3  may  be  found 
in  the  Book  of  Wisdom  and  in  Philo,  there  having  reference  to  Wisdom 
personified  and  the  Logos.  Of  Wisdom  it  is  said  in  a  notable  passage 
(Wis.  7:26): 

For  she  is  an  effulgence  {awaiiyaffixa)  of  eternal  light, 

And  an  immaculate  mirror  of  God's  energy. 

And  an  image  of  his  goodness. 

Philo  says  that  every  man  in  regard  to  his  intellect  is  related  to  the  divine 
reason,  being  an  d7rairyao-/xa  of  that  blessed  nature;'  and  that  the  Trvev/xa 
in  man  is  a  certain  type  and  x^-P^'^'^'VP  of  the  divine  power,  man  in  his 
reason  being  the  image  of  God.^  A  favorite  conception  with  Philo  is  that 
of  the  Logos  as  the  agent  through  whom  God  fashioned  the  world.  In 
De  Plantat.  5  he  says:  6  ^apaKT-qp  Io-tlv  dtStos  Aoyos.  In  Heb.  i  :6  the  Son 
is  designated  irpwTOTOKO'i;  so  Philo  often  calls  the  Logos  God's  TrptoToyovo? 
•ulo's  (as  in  De  Agricult.  12). 

Just  as  Philo  does  not  scruple  to  call  the  Logos  a  second  God  (6 
Sevre/aos  ©eds),^  though  dependent  on  the  one  original  God,  so  the  writer  of 
Hebrews  applies  to  Christ  passages  from  the  Psalms  in  which  God  is 
addressed,  setting  forth  his  eternal  royal  dignity  and  creative  role  (i  :8-i2) ; 
yet  what  Christ  did  was  part  of  God's  own  plan  and  under  his  direction 
(2:9,10;  5:4,  5). 

In  Philo  the  Logos  is  not  only  the  mediator  of  creation,  but  also  of 

I  De  Miindi  Opif.  51. 

»  Quod  Det.  Pot.  Insid.  23. 

3  Found  only  in  one  passage,  which  is  preserved  by  Eusebius,  Praeparatio  Evan- 
gelica,  Bk.  VII,  chap.  xiii.  See  E.  H.  Gifford's  edition,  Eusebii  Praeparatio  Evangelica, 
1903;  also  Drummond,  Philo  Jiidaeus,  II,  p.  197. 

70 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  71 

redemption:  the  great  high  priest,  exposed  to  affliction  and  misery,  an 
ambassador  sent  to  the  subject  race;^  not  a  man,  but  the  divine  Word,  a 
non-participant  in  both  voluntary  and  involuntary  sins;^  the  priest -king 
typified  in  Melchizedek  (Gen.  14:18-20;  Ps.  110:4) — the  names  Mel- 
chizedek  and  Salem  being  treated  in  the  same  etymological  manner  as  that 
we  find  in  Hebrews. 3 

Perhaps  the  most  fundamental  and  significant  fact  is  that  the  general 
view  of  the  world — the  cosmology — is  the  same  in  Philo  and  Hebrews: 
the  contrast  between  the  e/c  tS>v  iBedv  o-uo-ra^ets  K6a-fio<i  vorfTO's  and  the 
sensuous,  visible  world. '^  The  visible  world  is  a  copy,  a  shadow  and 
symbol  of  the  invisible,  spiritual  world;  created  things  are  perishable, 
divine  things  eternal.  Plato  and  Philo  distinguish  the  sensible  and  the 
intelligible  worlds;  so  Hebrews  contrasts  the  lower  world  of  semblances 
and  the  heavenly  world  of  abiding  realities,  related  as  type  and  reality, 
shadow  and  substance  (yiroBuyixa  koI  o-klo.  twv  iirovpavLiav,  8:5;  Trapa/3oXr} 
eh  Tov  Katpov  tov  cveCTTr/Kora,  9:9;  UTroSety/xaTa  twv  iv  rots  oupavois, 
dvTtTUTra  Twv  dXrjOivwv,  Heb.  9:23,  24).  In  Philo  the  mediator  of  the 
two  worlds  is  the  Logos,  the  firstborn  son  of  God ;  for  the  author  of  Hebrews 
the  heavenly  sanctuary  is  accessible  through  Christ,  the  Son  of  God. 
There  is  indeed  a  vast  difference  between  Philo  and  our  author,  but  it 
consists  in  the  fact  that  the  latter  was  a  Christian.  Philo's  abstract  theories 
are  made  to  do  religious  service.  The  chasm  between  this  mundane  sphere 
and  the  supernal  world  of  eternal  realities  is  bridged  and  free  access  to  the 
throne  of  grace  is  gained  when  the  Logos,  the  great  high  priest,  the  first- 
born son  of  God,  the  second  God  of  Philo,  becomes  the  Jesus  of  history, 
the  Brother  and  Savior  of  men  (4:14-16).  Philo  was  still  in  a  way  in 
bondage  to  the  letter  and  groping  in  the  dark;  but  his  pupil  had  learned 
also  from  a  higher  Master,  and  now  used  Philo's  own  method  and  thought- 
forms  to  show  that  what  was  formerly  the  world's  divinest  religion  must 
be  considered  but  a  shadow-copy  since  the  revelation  of  the  substance,  the 
perfect  spiritual  covenant  in  Jesus  Christ. 

Summing  up  the  thought  of  Hebrews,  we  observe  that  the  new  is  supe- 
rior to  the  old  because  Christ  is  higher  than  the  angels,  through  whom  the 
old  came  (Acts  7:53;  Gal.  3:19;  LXX  of  Deut.  33:2),  higher  than  the 
prophets,  whose  revelation  was  partial  (1:1),  higher  than  Moses  who 
organized  the  old  and  than  Joshua  who  ushered  in  an  inferior  rest,  higher 

■  Quis  Rer.  Div.  Haer.  42. 

'  De  Profiig.  20,  21.  - 

3  Leg.  Alleg.  3:25,  26;   Heb.  5:10;  7:1-10. 

4  De  Somn.  i  :32. 

71 


72  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

than  Aaron  and  all  earthly  priests  who  ministered  in  the  old.  He  is  the 
Son  of  God,  his  agent  in  creation,  revelation,  and  redemption  (cf .  i :  3  and 
Col.  1:15-17);  in  him  is  realized  man's  world-dominion  of  prophecy 
(2:5-10);  he  established  the  Old  Testament  system  (3:3;  cf.  I  Cor.  10:4); 
he  is  our  high  priest  from  heaven,  but  one  of  us,  possessing  sympathy  as  a 
priest  should ;  immortal,  abiding  a  priest  forever,  higher  than  the  heavens, 
a  son  holy  and  perfected  for  evermore,  minister  of  a  convenant  that  endures 
in  a  heavenly  tabernacle  with  spiritual  ordinances,  offering  his  own  blood 
which  is  efficacious  for  the  cleansing  of  the  conscience  from  dead  works 
to  the  service  of  the  living  God,  putting  away  sin,  obtaining  eternal  redemp- 
tion, and  perfecting  forever  them  that  are  sanctified — in  such  language 
is  set  forth  the  superiority  and  perfection  of  the  priestly  character  and  work 
of  Christ.  To  Christians  who  were  growing  discouraged  under  persecution 
and  in  danger  of  lapsing  into  their  former  heathenism  the  writer  exhibits  the 
glory  of  Christ's  person  and  work,  reminding  them  of  the  blessings  he  has 
secured  and  the  terrible  consequences  of  neglecting  his  salvation  and  deny- 
ing him. 

Hebrews  presents  a  remarkable  combination  of  the  philosophic  and 
the  historical.  The  facts  of  the  evangelic  tradition  are  known  (1:2,  3; 
2:3,4,13,14,17;  3:2;  5:5-9;  7:4,26;  10:7;  12:2,3;  13:12,20).  The 
recalling  of  the  gospel-narrative  where  Jesus  calls  men  his  own  brothers 
is  notable  (2:11, 12).  The  language  in  which  Melchizedek  is  set  forth  as 
a  type  of  non-Aaronic  priesthood,  underived  and  unlimited,  having  no 
father  or  mother  (7:3;  cf.  10:5),  might  lend  itself  to  docetic  Gnosticism, 
but  such  is  not  in  the  mind  of  the  author:  "for  it  is  evident  that  our  Lord 
sprang  from  Judah"  (7: 14).'  These  earthly,  human  experiences  by  which 
he  came  to  understand  man's  infirmities  and  needs  were  a  preparation  for 
his  highpriesthood  in  our  behalf;  the  center  of  interest  is  his  heavenly 
activity  on  our  behalf,  offering  sacrifice  and  interceding  with  God.  He 
came  out  of  the  heavenly  world,  lived  through  the  eternal  Spirit  a  life  of 
faith,  courage,  obedience,  sinlessness,  s)mipathy,  and  self-sacrifice,  and 
passed  into  the  heavens  as  our  perfect  high  priest — the  same  yesterday  and 
today  and  forever. 

There  are  several  striking  facts  about  Christ's  sacrificial  priestly  work 
as  here  presented.  Certainly  he  offered  himself  upon  the  cross  once  for  all 
(7:27;  9:14,  25,  26;  10:12,  26),  the  word  Xvrpwo-is  occurring  twice 
(9:12,  15)  and  KaTaXXay>7,  common  with  Paul,  not  at  all.  But  his  supreme 
function  is  as  high  priest  in  heaven,  and  sometimes  it  appears  that  it  was 

I  Philo  says  of  the  Logos-priest  that  God  was  the  father  and  wisdom  the  mother, 
De  Profug.  20. 

72 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    OHRISTOLOGY  73 

upon  the  heavenly  altar  he  presented  himself  as  a  sacrifice  to  God  (9:14). 
His  single  and  final  sacrifice  on  earth  has  a  counterpart  in  an  offering  at 
the  heavenly  altar,  and  there  is  also  a  perpetual  atoning  work  carried  on 
in  the  upper  sanctuary.  Secondly,  the  blood  of  Christ  is  not  only  sacri- 
ficial, but  also  cleansing.  Sanctification  did  not  belong  to  the  priestly 
oflSce  of  the  Jews,  but  his  cleansing  is  not  ceremonial,  but  real  and  inward, 
securing  deliverance  from  the  power  of  sin  (9:13,  14,  26,  a6eTr](n<;  Trj<i 
d/i.a/3Ttas).  As  in  First  Peter,  the  stress  is  upon  the  moral  effects  of  Christ's 
sacrifice  (KaOapi^eiv,  dyta^etv,  reXetovv).  How  this  purification  is  wrought 
is  not  here  elaborated;  the  fact  is  one  of  religious  experience.  Paul 
would  have  said  that  it  was  through  the  indwelling  Christ,  transform- 
ing the  believer  by  his  Spirit. 

Eschatology. — The  common  eschatological  ideas  of  the  period  are 
found:  Christ's  appearance  a  second  time  apart  from  sin  to  complete 
the  salvation  of  his  own  (9:28;  10:25,  37);  the  approaching  day  when 
earth  and  heaven  shall  tremble  and  things  not  stable  be  overthrown,  and 
the  kingdom  that  cannot  be  shaken  shall  remain  (i  2 :  26-28) ;  the  sabbath- 
rest  of  the  messianic  age  typified  by  the  rest  of  Canaan  (aafi/SaT Lcrfi6<:, 
4:9);  the  better  and  abiding  possession,  the  great  recompense  of  reward, 
the  better,  heavenly  country,  the  city  that  has  foundations,  whose 
builder  and  maker  is  God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  inhabited  by  a  host 
of  angels  and  saints  (10:34,  35;  11:10,  16;  12:22,  23) — all  of  which  will 
outweigh  the  hardships  of  the  present  Hfe.  Salvation  is  future,  dependent 
upon  the  faithful  observance  of  God's  will;  but  faith  now  makes  it  present 
— the  substance  of  what  we  hope  for,  the  proof  of  things  that  we  do  not 
see  (11  :i).  Colored  as  is  his  language  with  current  eschatology,  the 
author  comes  very  near  transcending  that  standpoint  through  his  doctrine 
of  immediate  access  to  the  world  of  reahty,  as  Paul  did  by  his  doctrine  of 
the  indwelling  Christ  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  did  by  its  doctrine  of  the 
Spirit  and  eternal  life.  Christianity  is  identified  with  the  upper,  heavenly 
world,  which  is  indeed  future,  but  is  also  present,  and  indeed  from  the 
beginning  has  been  the  world  of  reality,  so  that  even  now  men  can  taste 
the  good  word  of  God  and  the  powers  of  the  age  to  come  (6:5). 


73 


VIII.     CHRISTOLOGY  IN  FIRST  PETER  AND 
FIRST  CLEMENT 

FIRST   PETER 

Questions  of  introduction  to  First  Peter  present,  in  the  words  of  Wrede, 
"eine  Reihe  von  Schwierigkeiten  und  Dunkelheiten."'  The  difficulties 
are  created  by  the  address  and  the  conclusion,  and  Harnack  solves  the 
problem  by  removing  the  address  and  the  conclusion  altogether,  under- 
standing 5:1  {fxapTv:  T(ov  Tov  )(pi(rTov  TraOrjfioLTwv)  not  in  a  literal  sense. ^ 
According  to  this  view  the  author  was  a  prominent  teacher  and  confessor 
of  about  90  A.  D.,  perhaps  earUer,  who  did  not  pretend  to  be  Peter.  An- 
other, probably  the  author  of  Second  Peter,  invented  the  beginning  and  the 
end  of  the  epistle  in  order  to  give  it  apostolic  authority.  The  view  of 
McGiffert^  is  similar,  except  that  he  holds  to  its  true  epistolary  character 
(1:3,4,12;  2:13;  4:12;  5:1-5,9).  The  epistle  was,  he  thinks,  originally 
anonymous,  like  Hebrews,  Barnabas,  and  the  Johannine  epistles,  and  the 
name  of  Peter  was  attached  in  the  second  century,  some  scribe  probably 
writing  it  on  the  margin  of  the  manuscript,  because  he  thought  he  saw 
reason  for  regarding  it  as  the  work  of  Peter.  If  we  take  the  epistle  as  it 
stands,  the  only  reasonable  theory  open  to  us  is  that  of  pseudonymity, 
unless  indeed  we  make  Silvanus  responsible  for  the  epistle  in  the  name  of 
Peter.  That  was  an  age  in  which  men  could  think  it  a  virtue  for  a  writer 
to  withhold  his  own  name  in  favor  of  some  great  master.  It  must  be 
acknowledged  that  this  straightforward  epistle  does  not  bear  such  palpable 
marks  of  pseudepigraphy  as  for  example  Second  Peter.  But  in  view  of  the 
pseudepigraphic  customs  of  the  time  it  is  conceivable  that  a  Roman  Chris- 
tian, wishing  to  issue  a  letter  of  consolation  to  his  persecuted  fellow-Chris- 
tians of  Asia  Minor  under  an  apostolic  title,  chose  the  name  of  Peter.  In 
fact  we  know  six  early  Christian  writings  connected  with  the  name  of 
Peter — the  two  canonical  letters,  the  Acts,  the  Gospel,  the  Preaching,  and 
the  Apocalypse  of  Peter.  Great  as  are  the  difficulties  in  connection  with 
the  authorship  of  First  Peter,  the  most  difficult  position  of  all  would  be  the 
assumption  that  Peter,  the  apostle  of  the  circumcision,  wrote  in  fairly  good 
Greek,  even  with  the  help  of  Silvanus,  this  letter,  saturated  as  it  is  with 

'  "Bemerkungen  zu  Harnack's  Hypothese  iiber  die  Adresse  des  I.  Petrusbriefs," 
Zeitschrift  filr  N.  T.  Wissenschaft,  I,  1900,  S.  75-85 — an  able  reply  to  Harnack. 

^Chronologic,  S.  451—65. 

i  Apostolic  Age,  p.  596. 
74]  74 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  75 

characteristic  Pauline  thought  and  vocabulary,  to  gentile  churches  of  Asia 
Minor  founded  chiefly  by  Paul. 

The  conditions  set  forth  in  the  epistle,  reflecting  a  general  persecution 
of  Christians  as  such  (4:15,  16;  5:9),  are  best  satisfied  by  the  reign  of 
Domitian  (81-96),  and  the  doctrinal  affinities  are  mostly  with  the  literature 
of  this  period.  But  we  must  leave  open  the  possibiUty  of  a  date  within 
the  reign  of  Trajan  (98-117),  either  about  100  (Jijlicher)  or  about  112  A.  D. 
The  fact  that  one  suffered  ws  xP'-^'^'-"^^°'>  (4  •  i  S)  reminds  us  of  the  famous 
letter  of  Pliny  to  Trajan  regarding  the  treatment  of  Christians,  about  112 
A.  D.,  and  if  we  take  the  word  dAXoTpuTrto-KOTros  in  the  same  verse  to 
refer  to  the  judicial  informer,  the  delator,  which  is  not  necessary,  this  late 
date  is  confirmed.  But  this  would  take  the  epistle  far  down  toward  the 
terminus  ad  quern,  the  letter  of  Polycarp  {ca.  1 16  A.  d.),  which  makes  frequent 
quotation  from  First  Peter.  If  the  use  of  First  Peter  by  Clement  of  Rome 
could  be  established,  the  year  95  would  be  the  terminus  ad  quern,  but  the 
numerous  striking  resemblances  (for  example,  dyaTrr)  KaXmrrec  ttXtjOo^ 
d/JxipTLwv,  I  Pet.  4:8,  and  I  Clem.  49:5)  may  be  explained  by  proximity  of 
date  and  place  of  composition. 

First  Peter  was  written  apparently  from  Rome  (5:13;  Apoc.  14:8. 
So  far  as  we  know,  Babylon  played  small  part  in  early  Christian  history) 
to  Christians  of  Pontus,  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Asia,  and  Bithynia  (i  :i) — 
five  provinces  that  comprise  the  whole  of  Asia  Minor  north  of  Mt.  Taurus. 
Though  7rap€irL8r)ixoL  AtacTTropas,  the  readers  were  in  general  gentile 
believers  (1:14,  18;  2:9,  10;  4:3,  4).  The  purpose  of  the  epistle  is  to 
admonish  and  encourage  (irapaKaXeLv,  5:12)  its  readers  patiently  to 
endure  sufferings  that  have  come  upon  them  on  account  of  their  Christian 
confession  and  to  live  in  every  way  worthy  of  the  Christian  name.  The 
incentives  to  this  course  are  to  be  found  in  the  hope  of  a  blessedness  to 
be  obtained  through  suffering  and  obedience,  and  in  the  example  of  Christ. 
The  common  church-doctrine  is  employed  wherever  it  will  serve  the  prac- 
tical aim.  While  the  object  is  not  indoctrination,  for  the  writer  the  Chris- 
tian world-view  lies  behind  all  right  thinking  and  right  conduct.  The 
epistle  offers  no  original  doctrinal  contribution  to  the  development  of  early 
Christianity,  but  it  does  bring  incidentally  to  light  ideas  that  are  not  given 
definite  expression  in  other  writings  that  have  come  down  to  us  from  the 
period  to  which  it  belongs. 

The  epistle  is  then  not  to  be  understood  as  in  any  sense  representing 
the  most  primitive  Christianity— either  as  actually  pre-PauUne,  or  as 
Petrine  with  comparatively  slight  Pauline  influence.  ,  We  find  here  no 
genuine  reminiscence  of  Jesus  and  no  echo  of  the  old  controversies  about 

75 


76  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

the  law  and  faith  and  the  relative  standing  of  Jew  and  gentile.  The 
permanent  Pauline  contributions  to  Christianity  are  presupposed  through- 
out, but  by  this  time  the  sharp  points  of  his  system  have  been  worn  down. 
Some  of  Paul's  characteristic  expressions  and  ideas  are  employed,  especially 
from  Romans,  but  the  specifically  Pauline  thoughts  of  justification  by 
faith,  freedom  from  the  law,  dying  to  the  flesh  and  living  in  the  Spirit, 
mystical  union  with  Christ,  are  wanting.  Paul's  use  of  baptism  in  Rom. 
6:3:  "All  we  who  were  baptized  into  Christ  Jesus  were  baptized  into  his 
death,"  recurs  after  a  fashion  in  I  Pet.  3:21.  In  this  chapter  Paul  con- 
tinues in  his  striking  and  profound  mystical  manner  (Rom.  6:6  £f.):  "Our 
old  man  was  crucified  with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  done  away, 
that  we  should  no  longer  be  in  bondage  to  sin,  for  he  that  has  died  is  justi- 
fied from  sin,"  etc. ;  whereas  in  I  Pet.  4 :  i  it  is  expressed :  "  He  that  has  suf- 
fered in  the  flesh  has  ceased  from  sin."  On  the  other  hand  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  value  of  Christianity,  of  the  high  and  peculiar  calling  of  God's 
people,  of  the  greatness  and  preciousness  of  the  promises,  of  the  sacred 
obligations  of  the  Christian  profession,  are  no  less  clear  and  impressive 
than  with  Paul.' 

We  now  inquire  what  lies  central  in  the  doctrinal  background  from 
which  this  practical  homily  proceeds.  That  which  for  the  writer  comes 
first  is  the  revelation  of  God  and  a  way  of  life  in  Christ.  His  reUgious 
world  is  the  Christian  world,  his  view  of  God  rs  that  which  has  historically 
come  from  Christ;  he  worships  "the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ"  (1:3);  God  is  a  faithful  Creator  (4:i9)»  is  mighty  (5:6),  is  holy 
(1:5),  is  judge  of  living  and  dead  (4:5),  is  one  who  judges  righteously 
(2:23)  and  without  respect  of  persons  (1:17),  is  one  who  foreknows  the 
elect  (i  :i2),  is  one  who  resists  the  proud  (5:5);  but  he  is  above  all  Father 
(1:17)  and  the  God  of  all  grace  (5 :  10),  is  long  suffering  (3 :  20)  and  merci- 
ful (1:3).  The  means  by  which  this  grace  is  communicated  is  the  preach- 
ing of  the  gospel,  the  word  of  good  news  which  is  preached  (1:12,  25). 
This  then  is  the  first  and  most  general  item  in  the  writer's  Christology: 
the  God  he  worships  is,  as  he  thinks,  the  God  of  Jesus,  and  his  readers 
are  ol  8t'  avrov  Trio-rot  eis  0£o'v  (1:21).  In  Christianity,  in  Christ,  he 
finds  a  helpful,  satisfying  experience  of  God,  and  as  a  correlate  of  that 
faith  the  true  way  of  life. 

The  second  item  in  his  christological  faith  is  the  redemptive  death  of 

Christ.     "For  Christ  also  died  once  for  sins  as  the  righteous  one  for  the 

unrighteous,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God"  (3:18).     He  "bore  our  sins  in 

his  body  on  the  tree,  that  having  died  unto  sins  he  might  live  unto  righteous- 

1  So  Pflelderer,  Das  Urchristentum,  2d  ed.  (1902),  II,  S.  506. 

76 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHBISTOLOGY  77 

ness;  by  whose  bruise  you  were  healed"  (2:24).  This  language  means 
just  what  it  seems  to  mean;  namely,  that,  as  it  is  expressed  in  Heb.  9:28, 
Christ  was  once  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many,  and  it  is  here  added  that 
the  cross  was  the  altar  upon  which  he  was  offered.  The  writer  constantly 
uses  the  conception  of  Isa.,  chap.  53.  To  be  sure,  there  is  introduced  an 
ethical  significance:  in  Christ's  sacrificial  death  there  is  an  example  for 
our  imitation;  those  to  whom  he  writes  were  redeemed  from  their  vain 
heathen  life  handed  down  from  their  fathers,  with  the  precious  blood  of 
Christ,  as  of  a  lamb  without  spot  and  without  blemish  (i  :i8,  19),  and  in 
suffering  for  them  Christ  has  given  them  an  example,  that  they  should 
follow  his  steps  (2:21).  But  fundamental  is  the  thought  of  the  expiatory 
death,  though  the  use  made  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  ethical. 

An  ever-present  thought  is  that  of  the  coming  glory  of  Christ,  when  he- 
is  revealed,  and  in  this  Christians  shall  share.  Its  certainty  rests  on  his 
resurrection  and  exaltation.  God  has  begotten  us  again  unto  a  living 
hope  through  the  resurrection  of  Christ  from  the  dead  (i  :3).  This  hope 
has  been  awakened  by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel;  the  readers  have  been 
begotten  through  the  living  and  abiding  word  of  God  (1:23).  The  test 
and  fruit  of  Christian  faith  and  hope  are  to  be  found  in  obedience,  which 
consists  in  a  holy  life  after  the  character  of  God  (i :  14-16) ;  more  especially 
in  patient  endurance  of  suffering,  and  in  fervent  brotherly  love,  which 
covers  a  multitude  of  sins  (1:22;   4:8). 

The  christological  peculiarities  are  the  doctrine  of  the  inspiration  of 
the  prophets  through  the  spirit  of  the  pre-existing  Christ,  and  that  of  the 
descent  of  Christ  to  Hades  for  the  purpose  of  preaching  to  the  spirits  in 
prison,  and  for  this  reason  a  fuller  treatment  will  be  accorded  these  subjects 
than  has  been  given  to  other  features  of  the  Petrine  Christology. 

I.  Upon  the  first  topic  the  following  are  the  passages  to  come  before  us: 

"For  this  Christ  was  indeed  destined  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  but  he  has  been  manifested  at  the  end  of  the  times  for  your  sake" 
(1:20). 

"To  this  salvation  the  prophets,  who  prophesied  in  regard  to  the  grace 
intended  for  you,  directed  their  inquiries  and  researches,  seeking  to  find 
out  to  what  season  or  what  kind  of  a  season  the  spirit  of  Christ  within  them 
was  pointing,  when  testifying  in  advance  to  the  sufferings  which  would 
befall  Christ  and  the  glories  which  would  follow;  and  to  them  it  was  revealed 
that  not  for  themselves  but  for  you  were  they  performing  this  service  in 
regard  to  truths  which  have  been  announced  to  you  through  those  who, 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  sent  from  heaven,  have  brought  you  the  good  tidings — 
matters  into  which  angels  are  longing  to  look"  (i :  10-12). 

77 


78  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

In  the  first  of  these  passages  we  find  contrasted  the  foreknowledge  by 
God  of  Christ  before  the  foundation  of  the  world  and  his  manifestation 
at  the  end  of  the  times.  As  the  translation  given  above  implies,  fore- 
knowledge {iTpotyvoya-fjiivov  is  the  form  here)  in  this  passage  as  elsewhere 
in  the  Scriptures  ("Before  I  formed  thee  in  the  womb  I  knew  thee" — Jer. 
1:5)  is  not  colorless  prescience,  but  previous  designation  to  a  position  or 
function.^  The  idea  of  Christ's  designation  before  the  foundations  of  the 
world  were  laid  is  a  familiar  one,  finding  frequent  expression  both  in 
Jewish  messianism  and  in  Christian  literature  (Eph.  3:11;  II  Tim.  i :  9). 

"Foreknown"  by  itself  does  not  of  course  necessarily  imply  the  personal 
pre-existence  of  the  object  foreknown;  the  expression  is  used  of  believers 
in  I  Pet.  1 : 2.  But  pre-existence  is  taken  for  granted,  and  the  second  clause 
places  it  beyond  all  doubt.  That  which  is  manifested  existed  in  a  state  of 
concealment  before  its  manifestation.  Nowhere  is  it  said  of  believers  that 
they  were  first  foreknown  before  the  foundation  of  the  world  and  then 
manifested.  In  some  of  the  passages  either  in  a  primary  or  a  secondary 
sense  Pauline  it  is  the  mystery  concerning  Christ  which  is  manifested,  as 
in  Rom.  16:25,  26:  "the  mystery  kept  in  silence  through  times  eternal, 
but  now  manifested;"  but  in  the  passage  before  us  it  is  Christ  himself 
who  is  manifested. 

Both  clauses  find  an  exact  parallel  in  Enoch  48:6,  7:  "And  for  this 
reason  he  has  been  chosen  and  hidden  before  him  before  the  creation  of 
the  world  and  forevermore,  and  the  wisdom  of  the  Lord  of  Spirits  has 
revealed  to  him  the  holy  and  righteous;"  and  again,  62:7:  "For  the  Son 
of  man  was  hidden  before  him  and  the  Most  High  preserved  him  in  the 
presence  of  his  might  and  revealed  him  to  the  elect."  To  these  may  be 
added  Apocalypse  of  Ezra  12:32:  "This  is  the  anointed  one,  whom  the 
Most  High  has  kept  to  the  end  of  days,  who  shall  spring  up  out  of  the  seed 
of  David,  and  he  shall  come  and  speak  to  them  and  reprove  them  for  their 
wickedness  and  their  unrighteousness,  and  shall  heap  up  before  them  their 
contemptuous  deahngs."  In  I  Tim.  3:16  we  have  a  fragment  of  an  early 
Christian  hymn,  of  which  the  first  line  is:  "He  was  manifested  in  the 
flesh"  (i<l>av€p(aOr]  iv  uapKi).  The  idea  is  common  in  the  Johannine 
viTitings:  John  i :  14,  31 ;  I  John  3:5,  8,  for  example.^ 

In  the  second  passage  it  is  stated  that  the  prophets  of  old  who  foretold 

'  See  Hort,  Commentary,  on  this  passage. 

2  It  will  be  seen  that  First  Peter  is  using,  not  the  Pauline  conception  of  an  incarna- 
tion, but  the  messianic  conception  of  a  revelation.  For  Paul,  Christ's  appearance 
was  not  a  mere  (pavepovffdai.,  but  a  Kevovadai,  TaireivomOai,  TTTWxeiJttv.  So  Harnack, 
History  of  Dogma,  I,  p.  328. 

78 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHKISTOLOGY  79 

the  messianic  salvation  sought  to  fathom  its  meaning  and  to  determine  at 
what  appointed  date  it  would  come;  the  Spirit  of  Christ  within  them 
pointed  out  the  sufferings  that  would  come  upon  Christ  and  the  glories  that 
would  follow  them,  and  it  was  revealed  to  them  that  the  realization  of 
their  vision  was  not  for  their  own  time,  but  for  the  recipients  of  the  good 
tidings  in  the  time  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  ministration. 

The  problem  here  is  to  determine  in  what  sense  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
inspired  the  prophets.  Kuhl'  understands  the  reference  of  the  ideal  Christ, 
who  existed  only  in  the  foreknowledge  of  God.  Hort  says:  "This  cannot 
possibly  mean  the  sufferings  of  Christ  in  our  sense  of  the  word,  i.  e.,  the 
sufferings  which  as  a  matter  of  history  befell  the  historical  Christ."  Why 
not?  "It  is  inteUigible  only  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  prophets  and 
their  contemporaries,  the  sufferings  destined  for  Messiah."  But  the  New 
Testament  writers  did  not  take  the  point  of  view  of  the  prophets  and  their 
contemporaries;  they  wrote  from  their  own  standpoint.  Their  presupposi- 
tion was  the  identity  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New  Testament  sal- 
vation; see,  for  example,  I  Pet.  i :  25.  The  use  of  Christ's  pre-existence  in 
this  connection  is  but  a  part  of  the  process  of  Christianizing  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. The  Old  Testament  was  the  Bible  of  the  Christians,  and  they  read 
back  into  it  their  new  experiences.  The  conception  of  sufferings  destined 
for  the  Christ  is  a  common  one:  as  in  Luke  24:26,  46;  Acts  3:18;  17:3. 
In  Acts  26:22,  23  we  are  told  that  Paul  testified  (/u,apTvpo/u,evos) ,  saying 
nothing  but  what  the  prophets  and  Moses  had  said  should  come,  how  that 
the  Christ  must  suffer.  There  is  no  sharp  contrast  between  the  pre-existent 
Christ  and  the  historic  Christ,  and  of  "the  ideal  Christ"  the  writer  knew 
nothing. 

The  conception  was  common  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  source  of 
prophecy  (Acts  i  :i6  and  often).  In  Paul's  thought  the  Spirit  and  Christ 
are  very  closely  related,  indeed  at  times  used  almost  interchangeably 
(I  Cor.  12:3;  II  Cor.  3:17,  18).  In  the  period  in  which  our  writing  arose 
there  was  no  difficulty  in  considering  Christ  as  the  inspirer  of  prophecy, 
whether  as  pre-existent,  historic,  or  glorified.  The  historic  Christ  was 
represented  as  the  revealer  (Matt.  11:27;  characteristically  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel,  as  i  :i8),  in  whose  name  men  prophesied  (Matt.  7:22),  and  who 
sent  forth  prophets  (23:34).  The  exalted  Christ  poured  forth  the  spirit 
of  prophecy  from  heaven  (Acts  2:33).  "The  testimony  of  Jesus  is  the 
spirit  of  prophecy"  (Apoc.  19:10).  Between  Hebrew  and  Christian 
prophecy  there  is  in  this  respect  no  distinction;  in  each  instance  Christ 
inspired  the  prophets.     So  Barnabas  in  chap.  5:    "The  prophets,  who 

1  Meyer,  Kommentar. 

79 


80  HISTORICAL   AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

received  grace  from  him,  prophesied  of  him"  (ol  7rpo<]irJTai,  an  airov 
c;(OVTes  T^v  ^apiv,  ets  avrov  iirpoi^rjTtvaav) . 

The  prophetic  searching  for  the  time  of  messianic  deliverance  vAW  be 
recognized  as  a  characteristic  of  Jewish  messianism.  An  instance  of  such 
inquiry  is  in  Dan.,  chap.  9,  where  the  seer  discovers  in  the  prophecy  of 
Jeremiah  (25:11,  12;  29:10)  that  the  number  of  years  for  the  accomplish- 
ing of  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem  was  seventy.  But  as  the  Jews  were 
still  being  oppressed  by  the  heathen  and  the  temple  was  again  desolated, 
he  was  perplexed  by  the  prediction.  While  he  was  praying,  the  man 
Gabriel  flew  swiftly  and  caused  him  to  understand  the  vision.  He  explained 
that  the  period  was  not  seventy  years,  but  seventy  weeks  of  years,  and  that 
after  the  490  years  were  ended  reconciliation  for  iniquity  would  be  made, 
the  polluted  temple  reconstructed,  and  the  messianic  age  introduced. 

The  service  that  the  prophets  were  rendering  a  future  age  is  also  fre- 
quently brought  out  in  apocalyptic  literature.  Daniel  was  to  close  and 
seal  the  book  till  the  time  of  the  end  (12:4,  9).  Our  passage  may  even  be 
a  quotation  from  Enoch  1:2:  "I  understood  what  I  saw,  but  not  for  this 
generation,  but  for  the  remote  generations  that  are  to  come."'  The 
interest  of  the  angels  in  these  matters  may  have  been  suggested  by  Enoch 
9:1.     The  thought  is  closely  akin  to  that  of  Eph.  3:10. 

2.  Our  second  special  topic  is  set  forth  in  the  following  passages: 

"In  the  spirit  also  he  went  and  preached  to  the  spirits  in  prison,  who 
had  once  been  disobedient,  when  the  patience  of  God  waited,  in  the  days 
of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  being  prepared;  into  which  a  few  souls,  that 
is  eight,  escaped  through  water"  (3:19,  20). 

"For  this  is  why  the  good  tidings  were  preached  even  to  the  dead,  in 
order  that  they  might  be  judged  indeed  as  men  in  the  flesh,  but  live  accord- 
ing to  God  in  spirit"   (4:6). 

The  objection  to  the  obvious  sense  of  the  passages  before  us  has 
been  principally  the  strangeness  of  the  conception.  Perhaps  a  closer 
acquaintance  with  the  eschatology  then  current  will  remove  this.  Sheol, 
the  dark  underworld  in  which  the  ghosts  of  the  dead  flitted  about,  had 
become  a  definite  and  famihar  region  to  the  thought  of  late  Judaism.  In 
the  older  prophetic  stage  Jehovah's  self-manifestations  were  mostly  bound 
up  with  the  nation's  fortunes,  although  there  were  even  then  current  among 

'  J.  R.  Harris  {Expositor,  VI,  iv,  194-99)  suggests  an  interesting  emendation. 
Compare  the  following  passages:  Enoch  1:2;  Matt.  13:17;  Luke  10:24;  I  Pet.  1:12, 
13.  In  the  latter  passage  8ir]K6vovv  is  a  textual  error  for  dievoovvro,  after  Sievoo'ufj.rqv 
of  Enoch  1 : 2.  Then  there  should  be  no  break  in  the  paragraph,  I  Pet.  i :  13  following 
naturally  with  5taco/os. 

80 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  81 

the  people  ideas  regarding  the  abode  of  God  and  his  angels  and  the  region 
of  the  departed  (Gen.  28:12;  Exod.  24:10;  I  Kings  22:19;  I^^-)  chap.  6; 
Ezek.,  chap.  i).  Passages  on  Sheol  are  too  numerous  to  cite.  See  also  Gress- 
mann  {Ur sprung  der  israelitisch-judischen  Eschatologie).  The  Old  Testa- 
ment Sheol  is  essentially  the  Homeric  Hades.  This  conception  prevailed  till 
the  second  century  b.  c,  though  individual  voices  had  been  raised  against 
it  in  favor  of  a  more  moral  and  religious  view.  Then  it  became  a  place 
where  men  are  treated  according  to  their  deserts  with  separate  divisions 
for  the  righteous  and  the  wicked.  The  idea  of  an  intermediate  state  also 
entered.  Finally  it  was  used  of  the  abode  of  the  wicked  only,  either  as 
their  preliminary  or  their  final  abode.  Gehenna  was  the  place  of  final 
condemnation. 

In  order  to  realize  the  change  from  the  Old  Testament  Sheol,  a  place 
of  a  semi-conscious,  non-moral  state  of  existence,  where  family,  national, 
and  social  distinctions  of  this  world  are  in  a  way  preserved,  to  a  place  of 
fully  conscious  existence,  where  distinctions  are  primarily  moral,  we 
should  pass  in  review  the  Book  of  Enoch,  the  Book  of  the  Secrets  of  Enoch, 
and  the  Testament  of  Levi.  We  note  in  this  other-world  the  freedom  with 
which  spirits  come  and  go  and  converse  is  held.  A  second  instructive 
observation  is  the  solicitude  and  sympathy  now  and  then  manifested  for 
those  whose  lot  is  hard.  This  latter  characteristic  comes  out  most  strik- 
ingly and  most  beautifully  in  the  Apocalypse  of  Ezra.  The  writer's  heart 
is  not  satisfied  with  contemplation  of  the  messianic,  eschatological  pro- 
gramme according  to  which  this  evil  world  will  be  destroyed  and  a  new 
world  take  its  place,  for  "the  world  to  come  will  bring  delight  to  few,  but 
torments  unto  many"  (7:47).  The  fact  is  that  his  difficulties  are  never 
satisfactorily  met.  It  is  likely  that  there  were  others  both  in  Judaism  and 
Christianity  who  shared  the  same  concern  in  regard  to  the  destiny  of  sinful 
men  after  death. 

The  descensus  ad  inferos  appears  a  number  of  times  in  the  Christian 
literature  of  the  New  Testament  period.  It  is  a  special  form  of  the  belief 
that  is  found  in  First  Peter.  Certain  descriptions  of  Sheol  by  Old  Testa- 
ment prophets  seem  to  have  influenced  the  New  Testament  development 
of  the  conception,  as  Isa.  14:9, 10;  24:21,22;  42:7;  49:9;  61:1,2;  Ezek. 
32:17-32.  Some  significant  New  Testament  passages  are  the  following: 
I  Cor.  15:29;  Rom.  10:6,  7;  14:9;  Phil.  2:5-11 ;  Ma^t.  12:40;  27:52;  Acts 
2:27-31;  Eph.  4:8-10;  5:14;  Apoc.  1:18;  3:7;  5:13;  6:9-11;  20:7. 
To  these  may  be  added  the  Epistle  of  Ignatius  to  the  Magnesians  9 : 3  and 
Hermas,  Sim.  9: 16:5,  6.  In  the  Gospel  of  Peter  it  is  related  that  a  voice 
from  the  heavens  was  heard  on  the  morning  of  the  resurrection:  "Hast  thou 

81 


82  HISTORICAL   AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

preached  to  those  that  sleep  ?"  And  an  answer  was  heard  from  the  cross: 
"Yes." 

It  would  be  easy  to  show  how  congenial  the  conception  was  to  the  larger 
world  into  which  Christianity  was  entering,  which  had  its  own  stories  of 
how  dixane  beings  had  gone  down  into  the  kingdom  of  the  dead  and  returned 
victoriously,  but  the  form  in  which  the  conception  appears  in  First  Peter 
is  explicable  without  resorting  to  foreign  influences.' 

We  see,  then,  that  belief  in  the  descent  of  Christ  into  Sheol  or  Hades 
after  death  was  natural  and  necessary  in  the  light  of  the  ancient  view  of 
the  world,  and  that  it  appears  again  and  again.  We  find  suggestions  that 
in  connection  with  his  presence  there  divine  power  was  exercised.  We 
know  that  among  Jews  and  Christians  there  was  concern  for  those  who  had 
died  in  their  sins.  A  fundamental  declaration  in  the  Christian  message 
was  that  salvation  is  possible  only  in  Christ  (Acts  4:12).  So  far  as  regards 
the  present  generation  Paul  had  applied  to  Christian  preaching  the  words 
of  Ps.  19:4: 

Their  sound  went  forth  into  all  lands. 

And  their  words  into  all  the  world.     (Rom.  10: 18.) 

They  had  had  and  would  have  their  chance.  But  to  former  generations 
had  not  been  granted  the  opportunity  of  believing  on  Christ.  Now  as 
Christ  was  once  in  Hades,  he  must  have  preached  to  them  there. 

There  are  other  interpretations  of  these  passages  in  First  Peter,  the 
most  probable  of  which  is  that  which  identifies  the  spirits  in  prison  with 
the  fallen  angels — the  sons  of  God  of  Gen.  6:1-4,  and  the  sinful  angels 
of  the  Book  of  Enoch,  who  had  seduced  the  daughters  of  men  and  whom 
God  cast  down  to  Tartarus  (Jude  6;  II  Pet.  2:4).  According  to  one  view 
the  text  of  I  Pet.  3:19  may  be  emended  so  as  to  read  that  Enoch  preached 
to  the  spirits;  according  to  another  view  Christ  after  his  death  proclaimed 
their  judgment.  But  Kr)pva<reLv  is  uniformly  the  preaching  of  salvation,  and 
the  proclamation  of  judgment  to  angels  is  not  appropriate  to  the  context.^ 

FIRST  CLEMENT 

Arising  in  all  probability  at  about  the  same  time  and  in  the  same  place 
as  First  Peter  and  resembling  it  in  thought  and  language,  the  First  Epistle 

1  See  Pfleiderer,  Das  Urchristentum,  II,  S.  181,  288,  and  Clemen,  Religionsge- 
schichtliche  Erkldrung  des  Neuen  Testaments,  S.  153-56,  with  full  reference  to  the 
literature  in  Clemen.  The  defect  of  Clemen's  treatment  is  that  he  is  afraid  of  making 
"an  unnecessary  concession  to  the  religionsgeschichtliche  Schule." 

2  A  fuller  treatment  of  "  Christology  in  First  Peter  "  may  be  found  in  an  article 
by  the  present  writer  to  appear  in  the  American  Journal  of  Theology,  1910. 

82 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGT  83 

of  Clement  to  the  Corinthians  has  for  us  further  interest  and  value,  in  that 
it  is  the  eariiest  non-canonical  Christian  writing  that  we  possess,  although 
many  scholars  continue  to  date  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  still  earlier.  The 
letter  was  evidently  written  about  a  generation  after  Nero  and  after  the  death 
of  the  apostles  Paul  and  Peter  (5:1;  44:2).  The  persecution  experienced 
at  the  time  of  writing  was  more  annoying  than  bloody  (1:1;  7:1), 
and  answers  to  that  of  Domitian,  who  vexed  the  Roman  church  during 
the  last  years  of  his  reign.  The  name  Clement  does  not  occur  in  the  letter, 
but  according  to  tradition  Clement,  the  third  or  fourth  bishop  of  Rome, 
wrote  it  by  order  of  the  congregation.  In  the  oldest  Roman  list  Clement 
was  bishop  from  88  to  97  A.  D.  Africanus  places  him  in  the  twelfth  year 
of  Domitian.^ 

First  Clement  is  a  letter  from  the  Roman  to  the  Corinthian  church. 
Goodspeed^  makes  the  ingenious  conjecture  that  this  Epistle  of  Clement 
was  in  some  degree  called  forth  by  Hebrews,  whose  destination  was 
Rome.  The  Roman  church  occupied  an  important  position,  had  a 
long  Christian  experience  behind  it,  had  been  especially  privileged,  and 
it  ought  to  teach  (Heb.  5:12).  Now  it  proposes  to  discharge  its  respon- 
sibilities. 

Unforeseen  and  successive  misfortunes  and  reverses  that  had  befallen 
the  Christian  community  at  Rome  had  prevented  an  earlier  communication, 
but  an  unholy  insurrection  against  the  regular  church  authorities  at  Corinth 
had  so  injured  the  good  name  of  that  most  steadfast  and  ancient  body  that 
a  brotherly  letter  of  admonition  was  called  for  (chaps,  i,  47,  etc.).  Accord- 
ingly the  purpose  of  the  letter  is  wholly  practical ;  it  is  the  restoration  and 
maintenance  of  harmony,  in  view  of  the  serious  breach  of  discipline  among 
factious  Corinthians.  These  diflferences  in  the  Corinthian  church  were 
not  doctrinal,  but  consisted  of  personal  rivalries.  The  emphasis  of  the 
letter  is  upon  the  ethical  bearings  of  the  Christian  calling,  and  doctrine  is 
efifectively  employed  with  a  view  to  these  ends. 

In  the  course  of  his  admonition,  passing  from  ancient  examples,  the 
author  comes  to  more  recent  champions,  the  noble  examples  of  Peter  and 
Paul,  the  greatest  and  most  righteous  pillars,  the  good  apostles,  who  sufifered 
martyrdom  (chap.  5).  Striking  reference  is  made  (chap.  47)  to  "the 
epistle  of  the  blessed  Paul  the  apostle  " — our  First  Corinthians.  More  espe- 
cially does  he  draw  upon  the  language  and  thought  of  the  Epistle  to  the 

1  Pfleiderer  is  not  impressed  by  these  indications  of  a  date  about  95  A.  D.,  and 
on  considerations  of  a  general  character  dates  the  letter  in  the  period  from  100  to  120 
A.  D.  (Das  Urchristentum,  II,  S.  585,  586). 

2  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  p.  23. 

83 


84  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

Hebrews.  He  knows  and  uses  the  evangelic  tradition,  but  in  a  form  that 
varies  from  our  Synoptic  Gospels. 

The  letter  is  characterized  by  moderation,  sobriety,  "sweet  reasonable- 
ness" (cirtct'/ceia),  resembling  in  this  respect  First  Peter,  and  contrasting 
with  the  intensity  of  the  letters  of  Paul,  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  and  the 
letters  of  Ignatius.  Twice  the  ahnost  paradoxical  expression,  "earnest 
moderation"  (cktcv^s  cTrieiKcia),  is  used  (58:2;  62:2).  A  word  char- 
acteristic of  the  Christian  ideal  as  he  conceives  it  is  TratSevav  with  its 
cognates,  the  idea  being  that  of  training,  education,  instruction. 

Taking  up  now  the  christological  conceptions  that  emerge,  we  note: 

1.  The  mediatorial  character  of  Christ. — The  words  hta  'l-qaov  Xptarov 
occurring  twice  in  the  salutation  are  characteristic  of  the  thought  of  the 
whole  letter.  In  two  passages  God,  Christ,  and  the  Spirit  are  named  in 
the  order  of  the  baptismal  formula  of  Matt.  28 :  19  (46 : 6;  58 : 2).  Through 
Jesus  Christ  "the  eyes  of  our  heart  were  opened;  through  him  our 
foolish  and  darkened  mind  springs  up  toward  (his  wonderful)  light; 
through  him  the  Lord  would  have  us  taste  of  undying  knowledge"  (36:2). 
Through  his  beloved  Servant  Jesus  Christ,  God  has  called  us  from  heathen 
darkness  to  light,  from  ignorance  to  the  full  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  his 
name,  to  be  numbered  among  his  elect  in  the  whole  world;  through  Christ 
he  has  instructed,  sanctified,  honored  us  (59:2,  3). 

2.  The  pre-existence  of  Christ  is  made  use  of  in  the  spirit  of  II  Cor. 
8 : 9  and  Phil.  2 : 5  ff.,  as  in  chap.  16 :  "  For  Christ  is  with  the  lowly-minded, 
not  with  those  who  exalt  themselves  over  the  flock.  The  scepter  of  the 
majesty  of  God,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  came  not  in  the  pomp  of  arrogance 
or  of  pride,  though  he  might  have  done  so,  but  in  lowliness  of  mind,  as  the 
Holy  Spirit  spoke  concerning  him"  (t6:i,  2).  Then  follows  appropriately 
a  long  quotation  from  Isa.,  chap.  53. 

The  pre-existent  Christ,  as  in  I  Pet.  i :  1 1 ,  inspired  the  Old  Testament 
writers:  "Now  all  these  things  the  faith  which  is  in  Christ  confirms,  for 
he  himself  through  the  Holy  Spirit  thus  exhorts  us"  (22:1).  Then  is 
given  an  extended  passage  from  Ps.  34:11-17,  quoted  also  in  another 
connection  in  I  Pet.  3:10-12.  Thus  the  Old  Testament  revelation  and 
the  Christian  revelation  have  a  common  source. 

3.  Rank  and  significant  titles  of  Christ. — Following  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  the  letter  sets  forth  that  being  the  effulgence  of  his  majesty,  Christ 
is  as  much  greater  than  angels  as  he  has  inherited  a  more  excellent  name. 
To  him  have  been  given  nations  for  his  inheritance  and  the  ends  of  the  earth 
for  his  possession.  He  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God  with  his  enemies  for 
a  footstool  (chap.  36). 

84 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW   TESTAMENT    CHBISTOLOGY  85 

In  2:1  the  statement  is  made  that  "his  sufferings  were  before  your 
eyes,"  where,  as  the  passage  stands,  the  reference  is  to  God  himself — a 
form  of  expression  common  somewhat  later,  but  probably  the  reference 
to  God  is  not  intended  here.  One  is  reminded  of  the  loose  reference  in 
Heb.  1:8.  As  in  Heb.  3 :  i  Christ  is  called  "the  Apostle,"  so  here  it  is  said 
that  "Jesus  Christ  was  sent  forth  from  God,"  as  the  apostles  were  from 
Christ  (42 : 1,  2).  Through  him  God  is  glorified  (chap.  64).  As  in  Hebrews 
Christ  is  often  spoken  of  as  our  High  Priest  (36 :  i ;  61:3;  chap.  64).  There 
is  also  the  title  of  Patron  or  Guardian  {Trpoa-TaTrjs) ,  and  he  is  the  Helper 
of  our  weakness  (36 :  i ) . 

4.  His  redemptive  sufferings  and  death. — The  letter  dwells  upon  the 
subjective  effect  of  the  death  of  Christ  upon  the  mind  and  conscience  of 
the  believer.  The  thought  is  akin  to  that  of  Heb.  13:15,  where  it  is  said 
in  connection  with  the  priesthood  and  suffering  of  Jesus:  "Through  him 
then  let  us  offer  up  a  sacrifice  of  praise  to  God  continually,  that  is,  the  fruit 
of  lips  that  make  confession  to  his  name."  But  the  stronger  sacrificial 
idea  more  common  in  Hebrews  is  found  here  also:  "Let  us  fix  our  attention 
on  the  blood  of  Christ  and  know  how  precious  it  is  to  God  his  Father, 
because,  being  shed  for  our  salvation,  it  offered  to  the  whole  world  the 
grace  of  repentance"  (7:4).  There  is  repeated  mention  of  the  blood  of 
Christ  (12:7;  21 : 6;  49:6),  and  frequent  use  of  the  conceptions  of  ransom 
and  deliverance.  The  attitude  toward  the  death  of  Christ  is  very  near  to 
that  of  First  Peter. 

5.  The  Christ  of  faith. — All  our  hopes  are  in  God.  Like  the  Old  Testa- 
ment saints,  "we  that  have  been  called  through  his  will  in  Jesus  Christ  are 
not  justified  through  ourselves,  nor  through  our  own  wisdom  or  understand- 
ing or  piety  or  works  which  we  wrought  in  holiness  of  heart,  but  through 
faith,  whereby  Almighty  God  justified  all  men  who  were  from  the  beginning; 
to  whom  be  the  glory  unto  the  ages  of  the  ages.  Amen"  (34:4).  Here 
as  in  Paul  we  have  a  recognition  that  divine  grace  is  the  ground  of  holiness 
and  Christian  morality,  but  faith  as  the  primary  condition  of  acceptance 
with  God  and  the  mainspring  of  the  Christian  life  is  not  insisted  on  as  by 
Paul.  Important  as  was  the  grace  of  hospitaUty  for  members  of  the 
Christian  brotherhood,  who  were  strangers  and  sojourners  in  the  world, 
Paul  would  not  have  co-ordinated  it  with  faith,  as  Clement  does  twice 
(10:7;  12:1);  nor  would  he  have  written  l/syois  Sixaiov/xevot  koL  fx.r] 
Xoyots  (30:3).  For  Clement  grace  is  not  in  opposition  to  law,  and  faith 
is  not  set  over  against  works  of  law.  Yet  there  is  no^degeneration  of 
Paulinism ;  only  the  presuppositions,  the  Pharisaic  training,  the  experience 
of  the  curse  of  the  law  and  longing  for  redemption^from^it,  the  polemical 

85 


86  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

demands  of  Paulinism,  are  absent.  The  letter  is  neither  Pauline  nor 
Jewish  Christian,  and  even  Pfleiderer's  term  "  Deutero-paulinism  "  is  not 
altogether  a  happy  one.' 

Faith  consists  of  a  religious  frame  of  mind  involving  love  and  obedience 
to  the  will  of  God;  it  is  the  mind  directed  toward  God,  trust  in  his  promises, 
obedience  to  his  will,  seeking  out  those  things  that  are  well-pleasing  and 
acceptable  to  him  (35:5). 

The  phrase  iv  Xpto-Tw  occurs  (1:2,  etc.),  but  the  Pauline  doctrine  of 
the  mystical  union  of  the  believer  with  Christ,  as  in  Rom.,  chap.  6,  is  not 
dwelt  upon;  our  mystical  and  ethical  participation  in  the  resurrection  of 
Christ  does  not  appear.  His  resurrection  is  mentioned  as  a  ground  of 
assurance  of  the  apostles  who  went  forth  with  the  tidings  that  the  kingdom 
of  God  was  about  to  come  (42:3). 

6.  Eschatology. — Up  to  this  point  in  our  treatment  the  christological 
standpoint  has  been  abnost  exactly  that  of  First  Peter,  but  it  is  striking 
how  little  use  Clement  makes  of  eschatological  conceptions  in  comparison 
with  the  large  part  they  play  in  First  Peter.  The  dTroKoXui/'is  'Irja-ov  of 
First  Peter  is  not  so  constantly  before  this  author's  mind.  The  future  hope 
has  been  entirely  transcendentalized  (^w^  ev  adavaa-La,  35:2).  A  con- 
siderable section  is  given  to  the  resurrection  that  is  coming,  of  which  the 
resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  made  the  first-fruit  when  he  was 
raised  from  the  dead  (24:1),  and  of  which  nature  ofi^ers  many  analogies 
(chaps.  24,  25). 

7.  Ethical  bearings  of  the  Christology. — Ethical  precepts  of  Jesus  are 
quoted  (13:2;  46:8).  The  chief  mark  of  Christian  piety  is  love  of  the 
brethren  (chaps.  48,  49,  50).     Chap.  49  reminds  us  of  I  Cor.,  chap.  13. 

I  Das  Urchristentum,  II,  S.  573-86. 


86 


IX.    APOCALYPTICAL  CHRISTOLOGY 

(the   apocalypse   of   JOHN) 

No  Christian  literature  of  our  period  is  entirely  free  from  apocalyptical 
influence.  The  eschatological  interpretation  of  Jesus  that  dominated 
the  primitive  Jewish-Christian  community  persisted  even  after  he  was 
interpreted  in  a  larger  way.  But  it  was  natural  and  inevitable  that  minds 
of  a  certain  type  and  in  certain  situations  should  make  larger  use  of  the 
apocalyptical  conceptions  of  Judaism  in  attempting  to  relate  Jesus  to  the 
problems  which  they  were  facing.  Among  the  Christians  the  same  con- 
ditions obtained  that  fostered  the  growth  of  apocalypticism  in  Judaism: 
oppressive  social  convulsions  and  the  messianic  hope.  Although  the 
Christians  did  not  constitute  a  nation,  they  inherited  the  religious-national 
feelings  of  the  Jews  and  regarded  themselves  the  true  Israel.  What  the 
Israelite  thought  would  take  place  in  the  day  of  Yahweh,  the  Christian 
looked  forward  to  at  the  second  advent  of  Christ.  Several  representatives 
of  this  type  of  literature  may  be  specified. 

I.  Second  Thessalonians. — This  epistle  may  have  been  Pauline,  but 
there  are  considerations  that  weigh  against  this  view  (cf .  i:6,  8;  2:11,15; 
3:6).  It  appears  to  lie  out  of  the  main  line  of  development,  having  points 
of  contact  with  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  with  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  and 
possibly  with  Second  Peter.  It  has  the  appearance  of  an  extract  from 
First  Thessalonians,  the  single  original  contribution  being  the  apocalypti- 
cal section,  2:1-12,  for  the  sake  of  which  possibly  the  epistle  was  chiefly 
written. 

As  a  consequence  of  the  belief  that  the  day  of  the  Lord's  coming  was 
about  to  dawn,  many  had  fanatically  abandoned  their  employments. 
The  epistle  insists  that  Paul  gave  no  teaching  to  justify  such  a  course. 
The  apostasy  must  first  come  and  the  man  of  lawlessness  be  revealed — the 
son  of  perdition,  who  opposes  and  exalts  himself  against  everything  called 
deity  {dcov)  or  an  object  of  worship;  he  sits  in  the  sanctuary  of  God, 
setting  himself  forth  as  deity  (2:3,  4).  The  mystery  of  lawlessness  is 
already  at  work,  but  is  being  held  in  check  by  a  restraining  power 
(to  KaTe'xo",  o  KaTe'xwv,  2:6,  7).  The  Lord  Jesus 'will  slay  with  the  breath 
of  his  mouth  the  lawless  one,  who  deceives  and  works  miracles  (2:8-10). 
The  Jewish  belief  in  a  final  manifestation  of  the  powers  opposed  to  God 
and  his  Messiah  under  the  lead  of  Antichrist  here  appears,  but  the  specific 
reference,  if  there  be  one,  is  not  so  certain.  Probably  the  Satanic  power 
87]  87 


oH  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

was  identified  with  Jewish  anti-Christian  fanaticism  and  the  restraining 
power  vinth  the  Roman  empire.  According  to  the  representation  in  Acts 
the  Roman  power  protected  the  church  from  Jewish  enemies.  If  this  be 
correct,  the  situation  is  very  different  from  that  of  the  Apocalypse  of  John, 
where  the  writer's  attitude  is  wholly  hostile  to  the  Roman  empire. 

2.  Apocalypse  of  Peter. — This  work,  of  which  only  a  fragment  is  extant, 
probably  falls  somewhere  in  the  first  half  of  the  second  century.  It  con- 
tains detailed  descriptions  of  the  redeemed  in  heaven  and  the  lost  in  hell. 
What  is  of  special  interest  to  us  is  that  its  sources  appear  to  be  Greek  and 
not  Jewish:  namely,  the  Orphic  cult,  which  in  turn  drew  from  oriental 
sources. 

3.  Papias. — Attention  is  called  to  the  millennial  passage  in  Papias, 
ascribed  to  the  teaching  of  the  Lord.^ 

4.  Shepherd  of  Hennas. — This  is  somewhat  distinct  in  character,  and 
will  receive  special  treatment  later. 

5.  The  Apocalypse  of  John. — Dionysius,  bishop  of  Alexandria,  who 
died  about  a.  d.  264,  held  on  sound  critical  grounds  that  the  Apocalypse 
of  John  was  not  written  by  the  apostle  and  was  not  written  by  the  author 
of  the  Fourth  Gospel  and  the  Johannine  epistles.^  The  parallels  between 
it  and  the  Fourth  Gospel  are  superficial,  such  as  the  characterization  of 
Christ  as  the  Lamb  of  God  (John  i :  29,  36)  and  the  occurrence  of  the 
term  Logos  in  the  Apocalypse  (19:13).  The  author  does  not  claim  to  be  an 
apostle  but  a  Christian  prophet,  and  he  calls  his  book  a  prophecy  (1:1-3, 
9;  22:7,  9,  10,  18,  19).  The  Hebraistic  style  and  the  Jewish  conceptions 
mark  him  as  a  Jew  by  birth.  He  probably  wrote  in  Asia  Minor,  but  used 
Palestinian  materials.  Irenaeus  correctly  fixed  the  date  "toward  the  end 
of  the  reign  of  Domitian."^  The  persecutions  of  Nero  and  Domitian  are 
distinguished  by  the  author  (6:9-11;  17:11).  Apparent  indications  of 
some  other  date  of  composition  are  due  to  the  use  of  earlier  material  (i  i : 
I,  2;  13:  18). 

Like  the  Jewish  apocal)^ses,  it  is  written  to  encourage  believers  to 
endure  trial  and  death  if  necessary  in  view  of  the  speedy  coming  of  God  for 
judgment  and  salvation,  only  in  this  apocalypse  both  are  mediated  by  Christ. 
It  is  a  violent  protest  against  the  fanatical  hatred  of  the  Jews  and  the  cruel 
persecution  of  the  Romans,  over  against  which  it  affirms  a  confident  faith 
that  destruction  must  overtake  these  hostile  elements  and  bring  in  the 
messianic  deUverance.     The  troublous  times  are  the  signs  that  herald  the 

1  Irenaeus,  Haer.  5:32. 

2  Euseb.,  H.  E.  7:25. 

3  Haer.  5:30:3;  Euseb.,  H.  E.  5:8:5,  6. 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHBISTOLOGY  89 

coming  of  the  messianic  age.  Domitian's  enmity  to  both  Jews  and  Chris- 
tians was  due  to  their  unwillingness  to  pay  him  the  honors  he  demanded.' 
Refusal  to  worship  the  image  of  the  emperor  was  punished  with  death 
(13:15;  20:4),  though  not  many  martyrdoms  had  yet  taken  place.  By  this 
means  there  was  engendered  a  sense  of  irreconcilable  opposition  between 
the  church  and  the  empire.  The  war  was  to  be  fought  to  the  bitter  end, 
but  it  was  a  spiritual  conflict.  Behind  the  world-empire  are  spiritual 
powers  of  darkness.  The  older  expectation  of  Christ's  speedy  return  to 
estabUsh  his  kingdom  was  revived  with  intensity.  Leading  the  armies 
of  heaven  against  the  hosts  of  Satan,  he  will  finally  triumph  over  every  foe. 

The  main  sources  are  Jewish.  It  is  not,  however,  like  the  Jewish 
apocalypses  written  in  the  name  of  ancient  patriarch  or  prophet,  and  does 
not  cover  stretches  of  past  history.  Christians  did  not  need  to  go  back  to 
find  prophetic  names,  for  there  were  ever  in  the  church  Christian  prophets, 
who  were  held  in  high  honor.  The  work  does  not  then  seem  to  be  pseu- 
donymous, though  we  have  such  a  book  in  the  A])ocalypse  of  Peter.  It 
became  common  to  re-edit  Jewish  apocalypses  in  a  Christian  sense.  In 
some  instances  our  author  appears  to  have  done  little  more  than  this. 
The  picture  of  the  Messiah  is  taken  from  Jewish  sources;  he  is  a  Warrior- 
Messiah  (19:11-16).  The  artificial  interweaving  of  imagery  from  various 
sources  produced  all  sorts  of  anomalies.  A  passage  representing  Jewish 
particularism  stands  side  by  side  with  the  broadest  universalism  (7:1-10). 
Also,  we  have  a  passage  written  before  the  destruction  of  the  temple  (11 : 
I,  2).  The  seven  letters  seem  to  be  an  altogether  original  and  unique 
feature.  The  conception  of  Christ's  setting  up  an  earthly  kingdom  at  the 
time  of  his  return,  of  the  reign  of  the  saints  with  Christ  a  thousand  years, 
of  the  loosing  of  Satan  out  of  his  prison,  and  finally  of  the  last  judgment, 
is  decidedly  Jewish  (20:1-10).  The  presence  of  Jewish  elements  did  not 
trouble  the  author  of  the  book,  for  he  believed  that  the  Christians  were 
the  true  Jews.  But  some  of  his  combinations  would  appear  to  us  grotesque, 
were  we  not  already  familiar  with  them:  the  Lamb's  book  of  Ufe  (13:8; 
31 :27),  the  marriage  of  the  Lamb  (19:7),  the  bride,  the  wife  of  the  Lamb 
(21 : 9),  the  lamp  is  the  Lamb  (21 :23),  the  throne  of  the  Lamb  (22:3). 

The  older  apocalyptists  did  not  exhaust  the  material  of  which  use  could 
be  made.  Babylonia  was  still  rich  in  mythological  lore.  Doubtless  from 
Jewish  sources  our  author  drew  new  material  whose 'origin  was  Babylonia. 
Events  originally  related  of  the  beginnings  of  things  are  told  again  of  the 

I  The  enforcement  of  emperor-worship  in  Asia  Minor  was  introduced  for  the  sake 
of  unifying  and  Romanizing  the  diverse  elements  of  the  empire.  It  was  offensive 
only  to  monotheistic  faiths. 


90  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

last  days.  Creation  arose  out  of  chaos  through  the  conquest  of  the  gods 
of  the  underworld  by  the  gods  of  heaven,  and  again  we  see  Christ  as  the 
heaven-god  leading  the  angelic  host  against  hostile  powers.  The  old 
serpent  or  dragon  of  the  ancient  chaos  becomes  Satan  and  the  Roman 
power  (chaps.  12,  13).  In  chap.  5  there  seems  to  be  the  introduction  and 
enthroning  of  a  new  deity  into  the  pantheon,  his  superiority  being  demon- 
strated by  his  ability  to  open  the  magical  book. 

Since  the  book  consists  chiefly  of  Jewish  apocalyptic  and  Babylonian 
myth,  what  is  the  Christian  element  ?  One  fails  to  find  in  the  picture  of 
God  the  fatherly  traits  taught  by  Jesus,  and  yet  by  the  identification  of 
Jesus  with  this  Jewish  Messiah  in  a  Jewish  kingdom,  God  is  brought 
nearer  to  men,  and  as  we  shall  see  in  a  moment,  the  Jewish  limitations 
are  really  swept  away.  He  is  frequently  designated  by  the  personal  name 
Jesus  (1:9;  12:17;  22:16);  sometimes  is  called  the  Christ  (11:15).  He 
is  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  and  the  family  of  David  (5:5;  22:16).  The 
number  of  his  apostles,  his  crucifixion  in  Jerusalem,  his  resurrection,  his 
exaltation,  are  mentioned  (1:5,  18;  2:8;  3:21;  11:8;  12:5;  21:14). 
Most  characteristic  is  the  designation  "Lamb  of  God."  It  is  probably 
connected  with  Isa.  53:7  and  the  Passover,  and  is  a  symbol  of  obedient 
and  self-denying  love,  though,  as  we  have  seen,  it  has  come  to  be  applied 
without  any  reference  to  its  original  signification.  As  in  First  Peter, 
Hebrews,  and  First  John,  the  death  of  Christ  is  presented  as  a  means  of 
purification  from  sin:  he  loosed  {Xv(o  not  Xovoa)  us  from  our  sins  by  his 
blood  (i  :5),  and  the  saints  have  washed  their  robes  and  made  them  white 
in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  (7:14;  22:14).  The  figure  of  purchase  is  used 
(ayopa^o),  5:9;  14:3,  4).  He  is  the  Lion  that  is  of  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
the  Root  of  David,  but  the  seer  saw  a  Lamb  standing  as  slain  (5:5,  6). 
The  inevitable  Daniel-passage  (7:13)  appears,  but  in  14:14  the  one  like 
unto  a  son  of  man  does  not  appear  to  be  Christ  at  all  but  an  angel  who 
takes  directions  from  another  angel. 

The  Christology  is  not  that  of  Jewish  Christianity,  although  a  mass  of 
non-Christian  material  has  been  incorporated  without  being  thoroughly 
assimilated.  The  author  believed  in  the  salvation  of  uncircumcised 
gentiles  and  did  not  think  of  the  Jewish  ceremonial  law  as  binding  on  any 
Christian  (5:9,  10;  7:9).  There  is  here  no  pre-Pauline  Christology, 
rather  a  high  conception  of  Christ,  a  broad  universality,  and  freedom  from 
Jewish  particularism.  As  with  Paul,  it  is  only  the  redeeming  death  of 
the  earthly  Jesus  that  is  dwelt  upon,  and  chap.  5  reminds  us  of  Phil.  2 : 5-1 1 : 
through  his  redemptive  death  Jesus  gained  a  place  of  glory  and  power  above 
the  highest  angels  (5:9).     The  dignity,  glory,  and  authority  of  Christ  and 

90 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    OHRISTOLOGY  91 

the  greatness  of  his  redeeming  work  are  set  forth  in  exalted  terms  and 
the  strongest  imagery  is  employed  (1:5).  He  is  a  priest  (1:13),  is  Lord 
of  the  church  (1:12-16),  is  pre-existent  and  eternal,  and  determines  who 
shall  enter  and  who  be  released  from  the  realms  of  the  dead  (i  :8,  17,  18; 
21:6;  22:13),  is  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords  (17:14;  19:16),  is  the 
bright,  the  morning-star  that  will  rise  upon  the  world  to  usher  in  the  con- 
summation (22:16).  When  he  is  described  as  17  apxrj  Trj<;  ktl<t€w<;  tov  Oeov 
(3: 14),  we  are  reminded  of  Col.  1:15,  18:  TrpwroroKos  Trd(rr]<s  ktictcws,  .... 
o<s  icrTiv[rj'\apxi^.  He  is  the  Logos  of  God  (19:13),  though  this  passage 
looks  hke  an  interpolation  in  view  of  the  fact  that  in  the  preceding 
verse  it  was  stated  as  a  mark  of  his  transcendence  that  no  one  knows 
his  name.  His  name  is  constantly  associated  with  that  of  God  (7:10; 
20:6;  21:22;  22:1,  3).  Given  titles  that  belong  to  God,  and  worshiped 
by  men  and  angels,  Christ  reigns  not  only  during  the  earthly  millennium, 
but  sits  with  God  in  the  final  consummation. 


91 


X.     CHRISTOLOGY    IN    THE    PASTORAL    EPISTLES 

The  pastoral  epistles  arose  in  the  first  or  second  decade  of  the  second 
Christian  century,  possibly  somewhat  later.  The  doctrinal  situation  is 
similar  to  that  found  in  the  letters  of  Polycarp  and  Ignatius.  It  is  likely, 
but  not  quite  certain,  that  these  epistles  were  known  to  Polycarp  and  Igna- 
tius.' They  were  not  improbably  based  on  genuine  letters  or  notes  of 
Paul  to  Timothy  and  Titus.  There  are  Pauline  passages  and  personal 
notices  that  bear  marks  of  genuineness,  especially  in  Second  Timothy  and 
Titus.  Yet  the  attempt  to  distinguish  the  authentic  passages  is  hazardous, 
and  hypothetical  reconstructions  are  not  here  attempted. 

One  who  regarded  himself  a  loyal  follower  of  Paul  proposed  to  safe- 
guard the  church  against  error  in  life  and  doctrine,  and  to  this  end  he 
urged  good  and  pious  living  and  warned  against  novelties  and  vagaries  of 
faith.  like  Ignatius,  he  saw  in  church  organization  a  defense  against 
evil  tendencies.  The  false  teachings  attacked  were  those  of  the  incipient 
Gnosticism  of  the  early  second  century.  The  notable  reference  in  I  Tim, 
6:20  to  "the  antitheses  of  gnosis  falsely  so  called"  (dvTt^e'o-a?  t^s  i/'crSw- 
vr/LAou  yvwo-ecos) ,  is  possibly  a  later  addition  and  may  refer  to  Marcion's 
dvTt^€o-eis,  a  voluminous  work  in  which  he  attempted  to  show  the  con- 
tradiction between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  gospel.  If  it  be  noted  that 
the  writer  failed  to  distinguish  between  tendencies  of  an  opposite  character, 
the  false  teachers  being  now  antinomian  and  now  ascetic  (I  Tim.  4:3-5), 
now  legalistic  (Tit.  1:10,  14)  and  now  spiritualistic  (II  Tim.  2:18),  we 
may  not  forget  that  these  various  elements  are  to  be  found  also  in  Gnosti- 
cism. The  dualism  combated  in  I  Tim.  4 : 3  and  Tit.  i :  5  lay  at  the  founda- 
tion of  Gnosticism.  When  the  life  of  flesh  and  sense  is  regarded  as  wholly 
evil,  two  courses  are  possible :  the  flesh  may  be  either  repressed  or  indulged 
without  restraint,  and  history  furnishes  abundant  examples  of  both  courses. 
For  those  who  despised  the  flesh  a  literal  resurrection  was  out  of  the  ques- 
tion; the  resurrection  had  already  come  in  a  spiritual  rising  from  the  dead 
— an  error  possibly  due  also  to  a  misunderstanding  of  Paul's  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection  of  believers  at  baptism  to  the  new  life  in  the  Spirit.  But 
it  is  evident  that  our  author  understood  by  the  resurrection  only  that  of 
the  fleshly  body.  Reference  is  frequent  to  intermediate  divine  beings: 
the  "endless  genealogies"  (I  Tim.  i  ■.4;  Tit.  3:9)  are  hierarchies  of  aeons 
and  archons,  Christ  being  the  center  of  these  angelic  powers.     If  the 

I  Pfleiderer  makes  too  little  of  the  evidence. 
92]  92 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    GHRISTOLOGY  93 

author  is  content  with  indiscriminate  denunciations  in  place  of  a  demon- 
stration of  the  fallacy  of  the  heretical  positions,  it  is  because  he  is  convinced 
that  the  deposit  of  the  faith — the  true  gnosis — has  been  handed  down  by 
the  apostles  against  all  sorts  of  error.  We  are  reminded  of  Polycarp. 
The  gnostic  position  is  further  met  by  placing  the  emphasis  on  obedience 
and  ethical  activities  instead  of  on  knowledge  and  speculation.  Chris- 
tianity is  an  ethical  religion  and  not  an  esoteric  philosophy.^ 

There  are  some  striking  Pauline  ideas  and  passages,  but  for  the  most 
part  characteristic  Pauline  truths  are  absent.  Instead  of  the  doctrines 
of  death  to  the  flesh  and  life  in  the  spirit,  of  union  with  Christ  so  that 
Christ  lives  in  the  beUever,  our  author  emphasizes  piety  and  good  works. 
Faith  appears  as  the  means  of  salvation  in  I  Tim.  i :  i6  and  II  Tim.  3:15; 
elsewhere  ttio-tis  is  mentioned  among  other  virtues,  is  used  of  correct 
belief,  or  stands  for  an  objective  system  of  accepted  truth.  Answering 
to  Paul's  idea  of  faith  is  piety  (e^o-cySeia,  Oeoa-e^eui)  manifesting  itself  in 
good  works. 

Savior  (o-wtt/p),  used  elsewhere  of  Christ,  is  here  (in  First  Timothy 
exclusively)  applied  to  God,  asMn  Luke  1 147  and  Jude,  vs.  25.  The  unity 
of  God  is  emphasized,  it  may  be  in  opposition  to  the  Gnostic  distinction 
between  the  God  of  creation,  of  the  Old  Testament,  of  the  flesh,  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  good  God  of  love  and  redemption,  revealed  in  Christ, 
on  the  other. 

In  I  Tim.  3:16  we  find  a  liturgical  confession  set  over  against  gnostic 
docetism — "the  mystery  of  the  reUgion"  (t^s  evo-e^etas): 

He  was  revealed  in  flesh, 

He  was  attested  by  the  Spirit, 

He  was  beheld  by  angels, 

He  was  proclaimed  among  nations, 

He  was  believed  on  in  the  world, 

He  was  taken  up  in  glory. 

The  union  of  the  human  and  spiritual  sides  of  Christ,  suggested  also  in 
I  Pet.  3:18,  is  developed  with  greater  fulness  in  the  letter  of  Ignatius  to 
the  Ephesians  (7:2):  "There  is  one  physician,  both  sarkical  and  spiritual, 
made  and  not  made,  God  coming  in  flesh,  true  life  in  death,  both  of  Mary 
and  of  God,  first  passible  and  then  impassible — Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  " — 
a  passage  quoted  by  Athanasius.  As  in  Ignatius  ancf  the  Johannine  theol- 
ogy, the  higher  nature  and  origin  of  Christ  is  fundamental:  he  came  into 
the  world  (I  Tim.  1:15).  Over  against  the  many  divine  principles  and 
intermediate  beings  of  gnostic  mythology  we  read:  "For  there  is  one  God, 
>  Scott,  Apologetic  0/  the  New  Testament,  p.  181. 

93: 


94  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

also  one  mediator  between  God  and  men,  the  man  Christ  Jesus,  who  gave 
himself  a  ransom  for  all,  the  testimony  in  its  own  times"  (I  Tim.  2:5,  6), 
where  special  emphasis  is  upon  his  true  manhood.  In  the  notable  passage, 
Tit.  2 :  13 — in  the  reference  to  the  blessed  hope  and  appearing  of  the  glory  of 
the  great  God  and  our  Savior  Christ  Jesus— by  the  "great  God"  is  probably 
meant  Christ  himself.  He  made  an  end  of  death  and  brought  life  and 
immortality  to  light  through  the  good  news  (II  Tim.  i  :io).  The  Pauline 
doctrine  of  the  significance  of  the  death  of  Christ  finds  echoes,  as  in  I  Tim. 
2 : 6  (dvTt'AuT/oov) ;  but  as  in  First  Peter  it  is  the  ethical  side  that  is  dwelt 
upon  (Tit.  2:14).  Our  God  and  Savior  Christ  Jesus  has  appeared  pri- 
marily to  redeem  us,  not  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  as  in  Paul,  but  from 
lawlessness,  from  an  immoral  life.  Against  gnostic  exclusiveness  the 
universality  of  salvation  through  Christ  is  set  forth  (Tit.  2:11;  I  Tim.  2:4; 
5:6). 


94 


XI.    THE  JOHANNINE  CHRISTOLOGY 

The  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  after  Paul  the  most  profound 
religious  genius  of  our  period,  and  in  originality  and  spiritual  insight  he 
does  not  suffer  even  in  comparison  with  the  great  apostle  to  the  gentiles. 
And  yet  we  know  nothing  further  of  him.  Since  the  latter  part  of  the 
second  century  he  has  been  identified  with  the  apostle  John.  Internal 
evidence  does  not  tend  to  confirm  this  tradition.  The  book  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  written  by  one  who  had  been  a  personal  disciple  of  the  Lord 
throughout  his  public  career.  To  cite  a  single  illustration,  the  son  of 
Zebedee  was  a  Galilean,  but  for  this  writer  Galilee  has  little  interest,  while 
in  Jerusalem — in  his  account  the  main  scene  of  the  Lord's  ministry — he  is  at 
home.  From  external  evidence  a  strong  case  can  be  made  for  apostohc 
authorship,  but  John  the  apostle  has  evidently  been  confused  with  John 
the  Elder — a  great  personality  who  arises  vaguely  out  of  the  darkness  of  the 
times.  Irenaeus  says  that  as  a  boy  he  used  to  hear  the  blessed  Polycarp  de- 
scribe his  intercourse  with  John,  who  published  the  gospel  while  dwelling  in 
Ephesus.^  Now  Papias  distinguishes  between  the  apostle  John  and  the  elder 
John,  but  Irenaeus  seems  to  have  misunderstood  him.  In  this  instance 
Eusebius  detected  the  confusion  of  Irenaeus.^  The  age  was  one  liable  to 
such  mistakes.  The  fact  that  Irenaeus  ascribes  not  only  the  gospel  but  also 
the  apocalypse  to  the  apostle  John  suggests  caution  in  accepting  his  testi- 
mony. It  is  a  question  whether  the  apostle  John  ever  worked  in  Asia 
Minor.3  Writing  to  the  Ephesian  church  Ignatius  addresses  them  as  those 
who  have  been  initiated  into  the  sacred  mysteries  with  Paul  (IlavAou 
a-vfifiva-rai.,  12:2),  but  mentions  no  such  relationship  with  John,  one  of  the 
Twelve,  as  would  have  been  likely  had  he  had  a  long  Ephesian  residence. 

There  is  little  reason  to  doubt  the  ancient  tradition  that  the  Johannine 
writings  rose  on  Asian  ground.  The  Christian  communities  of  Asia 
Minor  played  a  leading  role  in  the  history  of  the  primitive  church,  and  the 
Fourth  Gospel  is  their  most  valuable  gift  to  the  world.  The  time  was  prob- 
ably that  of  Trajan.  We  have  to  allow  for  the  use  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels, 
and  the  general  situation  is  such  as  to  make  extremely  improbable  any 
time  before  the  second  century!  In  the  letter  of  Polycarp  (7:1)  there 
appears  to  be  a  reminiscence  of  the  Johannine  epistles  (I  John  4:2,  3; 

I  Haer.  3:11;   Euseb.,  H.  E.  5:20,  24. 

a  Euseb.,  H.  E.  3:39. 

3  See  Bousset  in  the  Meyer  Kommentar,  "Die  Offenbarung  des  Johannis,"  and 
Encyclopedia  Biblica,  article  "Apocalypse." 
95]  95 


96  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

II  John,  VS.  7),  but  this  should  not  be  pressed.  The  year  a.  d.  iio  may  be 
given  as  an  approximate  date  for  the  Fourth  Gospel.  The  Johannine 
epistles  may  have  either  preceded  or  followed.  But  we  must  leave  open 
the  possibility  of  a  still  later  date  for  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Identity  of 
authorship  cannot  be  established  for  the  gospel  and  the  epistles.  They 
belong  to  the  same  school  and  are  closely  related  in  language  and  thought. 
The  resemblances  make  all  the  more  striking  the  strong  divergences,  in 
view  of  which  it  is  best  to  treat  them  apart.  The  Apocalypse  of  John 
has  already  been  treated,  as  belonging  to  an  earlier  period  and  to  a  different 
class  of  literature. 

These  writings  then  proceeded  from  an  Asian  school  which  seems  to 
have  originated  with  John  the  elder.  It  is  generally  assumed  that  the 
author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  a  Jew  by  birth,  on  account  of  the  Hebraic 
cast  of  his  language  and  his  knowledge  of  contemporary  Palestinian  Juda- 
ism. But  the  fact  that  the  work  furnishes  the  most  extreme  case  of  dejuda- 
izing  in  the  New  Testament  suggests  that  the  author  may  not  have  been 
a  Jew.  Personal  relationship  to  Jesus  and  direct  witness  to  the  events 
recorded  appear  to  be  claimed  in  gospel  and  epistle  (John  1:14;  I  John 
1:1-3),  but  the  consciousness  of  an  immediate  relation  with  the  spiritual 
Christ  and  such  passages  as  I  John  3:6  and  III  John,  vs.  11,  suggest  a 
different  interpretation. 

THE   FOURTH   GOSPEL 

The  Fourth  Gospel  has  no  parallel  in  the  history  of  primitive  Chris- 
tianity. In  the  author  are  combined  receptivity  and  rare  creative  power. 
Gentile-Christian  thought  takes  the  form  of  gospel  literature.  The 
interest  is  not  historical  but  theological.  Indeed,  we  do  not  look  for  purely 
historical  interest  among  the  writers  of  the  ancient  East.  History  was 
employed  as  a  means  of  conveying  the  writer's  own  ideas.  Men  composed 
poetry  vrith  its  legends  and  myths  before  they  wrote  history.  The  Synoptic 
Gospels  are  primarily  pure  history- ;  they  were  written  for  the  purpose  of  evan- 
gelization and  indoctrination,  and  not  mere  chronicling;  the  adoption  of 
the  gospel-form  was  the  authors'  way  of  preaching  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
popularity  and  influence  of  the  gospels  proved  a  justification  of  their 
eflfort.  But  in  spite  of  the  theological  aims  and  idealizing  tendencies  of 
the  synoptists,  they  were  interested  in  the  facts.  In  his  preface  Luke  pro- 
poses to  give  an  orderly  narrative  of  the  facts  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  John  is 
after  the  meaning  of  the  facts.  Now  Matthew's  purpose  is  certainly  similar, 
but  he  reproduces  his  sources  with  more  fidelity.  John  has  transformed 
everything.  He  gives  us  not  a  photograph  but  a  painting,  an  interpreta- 
tion, such  as  Plato  gives  of  Socrates.     Facts  are  related  because  of  their 

96 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  97 

revealing  power.  For  this  purpose  the  traditions  of  Jesus'  life  current 
in  the  church  are  drawn  upon.  It  seems  that  the  most  important  sources 
were  our  Synoptic  Gospels,  but  to  some  extent  they  are  supplemented — at 
some  points  possibly  even  corrected.  The  impressive  story  of  the  inter- 
polated passage,  7:53 — 8:11,  proves  that  there  were  elements  in  the 
evangelic  tradition  that  the  synoptists  had  not  incorporated  in  their  books. 

What  now  was  the  writer's  controUing  purpose?  It  is  perhaps  an 
editor  who  has  added  20:30,  31,  where  the  purpose  is  said  to  be  that  the 
readers  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  believ- 
ing have  life  in  his  name ;  but  in  any  case  it  well  sets  forth  the  character 
of  the  gospel.  The  author  presents  in  the  form  of  a  record  of  the  works 
and  words  of  Jesus  his  own  idea  of  the  significance  of  his  person.  The 
historical  life  has  abiding  meaning.  All  facts  are  read  in  the  light  of  his 
conception  of  Christ's  person.  The  messianic  title  and  office  are  absorbed 
and  lost  in  his  larger  and  higher  view  of  the  eternal  Son  of  God.  The 
great  figure  around  which  all  else  revolves,  he  treads  the  earth  but  is  not 
of  it.  Historical  development,  adaptation  answering  to  changing  environ- 
ment, are  mostly  wanting.  From  the  beginning  Jesus  knows  that  he  is 
to  die  at  the  hands  of  the  Jews,  is  aware  of  the  character  of  Judas,  foresees 
the  future,  and  is  indeed  omniscient  (1:48;  2:24,  25;  4:16-19;  6:64; 
13:18;  16:30;  18:4;  19:28).  Under  these  circumstances  there  is  no 
need  to  mention  the  Baptism,  the  Temptation,  the  scene  in  Gethsemane, 
or  prayer  except  for  the  sake  of  his  hearers  (11:42;  12:30).  The  dis- 
courses are  about  the  nature  of  the  Christ,  what  lies  back  of  his  manifesta- 
tion in  humanity,  his  relation  to  God,  his  pre-existence,  his  risen  life  and 
work  as  Spirit;  and  in  it  all  Jesus  speaks  beyond  those  immediately 
addressed  to  the  readers  of  the  book.  From  beginning  to  end,  and  what- 
ever the  situation,  the  content  of  the  teaching  is  largely  the  same.  Taken 
up  as  the  book  is  with  discourses,  there  is  not  a  parable  of  the  kind  familiar 
to  us  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels;  instead  there  are  allegories,  as  of  the  good 
shepherd  and  the  true  vine. 

There  were  specific  historical  circumstances  that  called  forth  a  work 
of  just  this  character,  and  we  may  discover  reasons  even  for  his  remarkable 
contrasts  and  contradictions.  There  is  for  instance  the  controversy  with 
"the  Jews."  It  does  not  concern  messiahship  or  theocratic  hopes  or  the 
law  in  the  older  sense,  but  the  divine  claims  of  Jesus  and  the  problem  of 
reconciling  them  with  monotheism  (5:18;  10:36).'  The  break  with 
the  Jews  had  become  irreparable;    synagogue  and  church  stand  apart, 

'  The  diflBculties  that  present  themselves  to  Jewish  opponents  are  like  those  of  the 
Talmud  and  those  Celsus  derived  from  the  Jews. 

97 


98  HISTOBICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

but  there  is  recognition  of  the  historical  relation  of  Christianity  to  Judaism 
(4:22;  5:46;  12:41).  We  hear  echoes  of  a  controversy  with  the  sect 
that  still  held  to  John  the  Baptist,  with  which  Paul  also  is  represented  to 
have  come  into  contact  at  Ephesus  (Acts  18:25;  19:3,  4;  see  also  the 
Clementine  Recognitions  1:54,  60).  Within  the  church  there  is  the 
Eucharistic  discussion  (6:32-59).  In  a  word  there  was  a  new  situation 
to  be  faced,  there  were  new  ideas  and  interests  of  which  to  take  account, 
old  forms  and  arguments  were  outgrown,  a  reinterpretation  of  Christianity 
was  demanded;  and  within  the  church  there  was  one  man  whose  nature  and 
outlook  were  sufficiently  large  and  cathoUc,  whose  hold  upon  the  essential 
element  in  Christianity  and  whose  understanding  of  the  abiding  meaning 
of  the  historical  life  of  Jesus  were  so  true,  that  his  religious  genius  proved 
adequate  for  the  crisis.  Three  of  the  determining  influences  in  the  con- 
struction of  his  Christology  will  receive  special  consideration. 

I.  Paidinisni. — A  half -century  had  elapsed  since  the  death  of  Paul. 
But  Paul  had  made  a  deep  impression  on  Asia  Minor,  his  influence  being 
manifest  in  Ignatius  and  in  gnostic  circles,  all  of  which  adopted  certain 
of  his  conceptions.  Perhaps  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  took  its  name 
from  the  place  of  its  origin;  it  carries  forward  the  development  on  strictly 
Pauline  lines.  One  more  powerful  v.dtness  to  his  influence  is  furnished 
by  the  Johannine  literature.  But  we  must  not  suppose  for  a  moment 
that  John  was  a  man  who  would  take  over  anything  directly  and  literally 
from  Paul.  He  made  no  such  use  even  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels.  Every 
Pauline  doctrine  that  he  holds  has  been  transformed  and  correlated  with 
his  own  religious  experience. 

Both  Paul  and  John  proceeded  in  their  christological  thinking  from 
their  experience  of  the  risen,  spiritual  Christ,  whom  they  knew  not  after 
the  flesh.  Paul  claimed  that  his  vision  and  knowledge  of  the  risen  Lord 
was  as  real  and  valid  as  that  of  those  who  had  seen  and  known  him  in 
the  flesh.  John  is  possessed  of  the  same  conviction  regarding  himself. 
Indeed  it  is  his  consciousness  of  communion  with  the  living,  eternal  Savior, 
who  stiU  reveals  himself  to  those  who  believe  in  him,  that  justifies  his 
free  use  of  his  materials,  in  the  spirit  of  I  Cor.  2:9,  10  (John  14:26;  15:26; 
16:12-15).  But  there  is  a  difference:  John  values  as  Paul  did  not  the 
life  lived  in  the  flesh.  He  did  not  think  of  it  as  a  kenosis  or  humiUation, 
though  it  was  a  condescension.  He  sees  the  glory  of  the  exalted  Christ 
resting  upon  the  earthly  life,  as  indeed  the  disciples  were  disposed  to  do 
from  the  beginning.  Paul  and  John  make  somewhat  the  same  use  of  pre- 
existence  in  connection  with  Christ's  redemptive  work:  Christ  is  able  to 
reveal  the  Father  and  to  save  because  he  came  down  from  heaven,  but 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  99 

for  John  he  did  not  as  for  Paul  divest  himself  of  his  glory  and  divine  pre- 
rogatives.' 

The  universalism  of  the  gospel  of  Christ  is  common  to  Paul  and  John. 
Our  author  was  a  world-Christian  to  whom  Jewish  law  and  prerogative 
meant  nothing  and  to  whom  the  requiring  of  circumcision  and  the  observ- 
ance of  Jewish  law  of  gentile  converts  would  have  been  repugnant.  In 
his  hostility  to  the  Jews  he  goes  far  beyond  Paul,  holding  out  no  such  hope 
of  the  ultimate  salvation  of  Israel.  Christ  brings  freedom  from  sin  (8 :  34- 
36),  but  not  freedom  from  all  law;  John  does  not  scruple  to  represent  the 
Christian  hfe  as  the  keeping  of  Christ's  commandments.  Yet  in  general 
he  reproduces  Paul's  idea  of  spiritual  freedom,  employing  even  the  figures 
of  servant  and  son  (8:33-39).  And  where  could  be  found  a  more  excellent 
statement  of  Paul's  doctrine  of  faith  and  works  than  in  6:29:  "This  is 
the  work  of  God,  that  you  believe  on  him  whom  God  has  sent"  ?  Never- 
theless the  view  of  faith  is  not  exactly  the  same.  In  John  faith  is  an 
attitude  toward  Christ  as  the  supreme  manifestation  of  God,  fixing  primarily 
not  upon  Christ  in  his  redemptive  work  for  the  sinner  but  upon  him  in 
his  relation  to  God.  Instead  of  trust  it  tends  to  become  behef,  just  as  in 
First  John  the  recognition  of  the  divine  Sonship  of  Jesus  and  the  reaUty 
of  his  incarnation  is  made  the  test  of  the  Christian's  standing  before  God. 

A  fundamental  difference  between  Paul  and  John  in  their  conception 
of  Christ  in  his  relation  to  men  is  that  Paul  thinks  of  him  primarily  as 
the  Redeemer  from  sin  and  the  flesh,  and  John  as  the  Revealer  of  the 
Father  and  of  truth.  The  redemption  wrought  by  Christ  is  for  Paul 
release  from  the  flesh  and  means  entrance  upon  a  new  and  holy  life  in  the 
Spirit.  In  John  likewise  there  is  the  contrast  between  flesh  and  spirit, 
but  the  new  birth  is  into  a  world  of  light  and  redemption,  a  transfer  from 
darkness  to  light.  Christ  came  to  take  away  sin,  but  his  central  work  was 
the  revelation  of  the  Father.  Sin  is  not  so  much  moral  evil  as  limitation, 
incapacity  for  the  higher  life,  and  unbelief  in  Christ  (15:22;   16:9). 

While  some  of  Paul's  controlUng  ideas  were  taken  up  by  the  church, 
others  just  as  essential  to  his  thought  were  not  appropriated.  His  con- 
ception of  the  believer's  oneness  with  Christ  was  too  much  out  of  line  with 
the  ordinary  experience  of  the  Christian  man  to  mean  much  to  the  church, 
even  when  Paul's  phraseology  was  retained.  But  in  one  form  or  another 
the  abiding  presence  of  the  spiritual  Christ  contirtued  a  matter  of  con- 
scious experience,  and  great  mystic  souls  like  John  and  Ignatius  could 
not  dispense  with  bold,  \atal  expressions  of  their  sense  of  union  vnth  the 
Lord.  The  union  as  conceived  by  Paul  was  not  only  ethical  but  somehow 
'  Therefore  there  is  no  occasion  to  introduce  the  Transfiguration. 

99 


100  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

ontological;  so  John  thought  of  the  life  communicated  through  personal 
union  with  Christ  as  a  kind  of  transmitted  essence,  though  he  often  describes 
it  in  ethical  terms.  In  this  connection  belongs  the  Eucharistic  discussion 
of  chap.  6.  So  also  Ignatius  writes  to  the  Ephesians  that  they  break  one 
bread,  which  is  medicine  of  immortahty,  an  antidote  against  dying,  causing 
them  to  live  forever  in  Jesus  Christ  (20:2).  Although  Paul  was  still 
looking  for  the  coming  of  Christ,  practically  he  could  realize  his  presence 
in  the  Spirit,  and  it  was  a  real  presence.  John  was  able  to  make  it  still 
more  real  (if  possible)  by  his  spiritual  understanding  of  the  parousia; 
for  him  Christ  had  already  come  and  was  realized  as  an  invisible  and 
abiding  presence.  The  coming  of  the  Paraclete  was  that  of  Christ  himself 
(14:16,  18). 

We  recall  that  Paul  fixes  upon  the  death  of  Christ  as  the  crowning  act 
of  divine  love,  in  which  Christ's  character,  revealing  the  character  of  God, 
is  summed  up.  John  too  sees  in  his  death  an  expression  of  love  (15: 13), 
but  vrith  him  it  is  chiefly  the  life  that  is  revelatory.  Overwhelmed  with 
consciousness  of  sin  and  the  law,  Paul  found  peace  in  the  grace  of  God 
revealed  through  the  cross,  which  was  an  expression  of  the  mind  of  Christ 
and  God.  For  him  it  was  enough  to  know  Christ  crucified;  the  death 
furnished  the  key  to  the  purpose  and  meaning  of  the  life.  In  John  the 
life  as  a  whole  occupies  the  place  assigned  by  Paul  to  the  death.  There 
seems  to  be  logically  no  need  for  the  doctrine  of  the  expiatory  death  in  the 
Johannine  Christology,  but  at  this  point  John  makes  no  formal  break  with 
the  current  church  doctrine.  He  appears  to  dissociate  the  Christian 
sacrament  from  the  Jevdsh  Passover  by  placing  the  Supper  on  the  13th 
of  Nisan  instead  of  the  14th,  and  making  it  the  prototype  of  the  Agape, 
so  that  the  crucifixion  coincides  with  the  killing  of  the  Paschal  lamb 
(I  Cor.  5:7).  An  explicit  connection  of  the  death  with  sin  occurs  in  1 129 
— by  no  means  a  characteristic  manner  of  speaking  with  him  and  most 
likely  a  reminiscence  of  the  church  doctrine.  The  death  is  an  act  deliber- 
ately accomplished  and  necessary  to  his  entrance  into  glory  and  return  to 
his  disciples. 

Paul's  idea  of  the  Son  of  God  was  not  only  the  religious  and  the  apocalyp- 
tic but  the  gentile  and  literal,  the  title  expressing  the  essential  relation 
of  Christ  to  God;  Christ  was  God's  own  Son  (Rom.  8:32),  pre-existing 
in  the  form  of  God  (Phil.  2:6).  John  pushes  this  conception  of  the  nature 
of  the  Son  and  his  relation  to  God  a  step  farther,  employing  the  name 
"Son  of  God"  in  the  full  sense  it  would  convey  to  the  Greek  mind — one 
who  was  of  the  same  nature  with  the  Father  and  was  always  Son.  He 
does  not  go  as  far  as  Ignatius  and  vnthout  scruple  call  Christ  God;   the 

100 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  101 

Logos  is  ^eos,  not  6  ©eos  (i :  i).  The  exclamation  of  Thomas  is  not  to  be 
taken  as  our  author's  characteristic  way  of  speaking  (20:28),  though  it  is 
of  great  significance  for  his  thought. 

2.  Alexandrianism. — Alexandrian  ideas  early  gained  a  foothold  in 
Asia  Minor.  In  Acts  18: 24  we  are  told  that  a  certain  Jew  named  Apollos, 
an  Alexandrian  by  race,  a  learned  man,  mighty  in  the  Scriptures,  came  to 
Ephesus.  The  epistles  to  the  Colossians,  the  Ephesians,  and  the  Hebrews, 
all  of  which  probably  rose  in  Asia  Minor,  bear  witness  to  the  extent  to 
which  Alexandrian  thought  and  method  had  already  entered  the  Christian 
movement  when  the  Fourth  Gospel  was  written.  In  his  masterly  and 
penetrating  work  on  the  Fourth  Gospel,  to  which  this  treatment  is  under 
heavy  obligations,  Scott  expresses  more  than  once  his  conviction  that  John 
was  directly  acquainted  with  the  works  of  Philo  and  was  conscious  of  his 
indebtedness  to  them.'  This  does  not  seem  probable.  We  have  seen  that 
Philonic  ideas  had  already  gained  currency  and  entered  Christian  thought. 
The  case  is  altogether  different  in  Hebrews,  where  the  author  shows  himself 
to  be  a  thoroughgoing  literary  Hellenist.  John's  undertaking  was,  like 
Philo's,  that  of  naturalizing  in  the  Hellenic  world  religious  ideas  originating 
among  the  Jews  of  Palestine;  but  he  had  no  such  philosophical  interest  and 
equipment  as  the  Alexandrian  thinker.  What  Philo  and  his  school  found 
in  the  Logos,  he  found  in  Christ.  As  Philo  used  allegory  to  read  Greek 
philosophy  in  the  Old  Testament,  so  by  means  of  allegory  John  was  enabled 
to  see  through  facts  to  their  true  import.  Allegory  had  been  employed 
in  the  rabbinical  schools  of  Palestine,  but  the  allegorical  character  of  the 
Fourth  Gospel  is  due  to  Alexandrian  influence.  Outward  facts  are  sym- 
bolical. Persons  are  types.  The  use  of  the  temple,  the  brazen  serpent, 
the  manna,  and  the  passover-lamb  (2:21;  3:14;  6:31,  32;  19:36)  is 
after  the  manner  of  Hebrews. 

Plato  had  elaborated  the  theory  of  ideas  which  separated  the  material 
world  from  the  world  of  higher  reality — a  conception  of  which  Hebrews 
made  much.  The  Stoics  brought  the  worlds  into  correlation  by  the 
hypothesis  of  Heraclitus  that  a  Xo'yos,  a  principle  of  reason,  pervades  the 
universe.  The  Logos  is  both  reason  and  activity,  inward  and  declared  (Xoyos 
cv8ia^£Tos  Koi  7rpo<f>opiK6<;).  Now  Jewish  thinkers,  confronted  by  the 
same  dualism  in  view  of  the  growing  impression  of  God's  transcendence, 
bridged  the  gulf  by  hypostatizing  Wisdom  and  the  Word  (Memra),  by  the 
mediation  of  angels  that  filled  the  space  between  earth  and  heaven,  and 
by  increased  reliance  on  their  law.  In  the  spirit  of  Plato,  Philo  looked  upon 
visible  things  as  the  types  and  shadows  of  reality,  and  with  the  Stoics  saw 

I  The  Fourth  Gospel,  pp.  55,  154. 

101 


102  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

in  the  Logos  reason  and  uttered  speech,  divine  energy  and  self-revelation. 
True  to  his  Hebrew  monotheism,  he  subordinated  the  Logos  to  the  supreme, 
self-existing  God.  In  his  thought  man  is  by  virtue  of  his  intelligence  akin 
to  the  divine  Logos,  and  men  who  know  one  Creator  and  Father  of  all 
things  are  sons  of  God.^  The  Father  of  the  universe  l)rought  the  Logos  into 
being  as  his  eldest  son,  his  firstborn,  who  imitates  the  ways  of  his  Father.^ 
The  Logos  distributes  to  all  the  true  manna,  the  heavenly  food  and  nourish- 
ment of  the  soul. 3  John's  prologue  contains  distinctive  Philonic  con- 
ceptions: the  eternity  of  the  Logos,  the  relation  to  God  (vrpos  t6v  ©eov), 
his  creative  activity,  and  his  function  in  the  illumination  of  men  (1:1-4). 
After  the  prologue  the  term  is  used  only  in  the  sense  of  spoken  discourse. 
John's  interest  is  not  in  the  abstract  Logos  but  in  the  personal  Logos 
made  flesh,  not  in  his  cosmic  but  in  his  saving  significance.  Philo's 
cosmology  falls  into  the  background.  It  is  possible  but  not  hkely  that 
along  with  a  number  of  alterations  in  the  text  of  the  Johannine  literature 
the  prologue  also  was  affixed.  The  Logos-doctrine  is  in  a  way  assumed 
throughout. 

We  have  then  a  truth  of  religious  experience  stated  in  terms  of  Alex- 
andrian speculation.  The  fact  was  that  Jesus  had  revealed  God.  There- 
fore he  is  identified  with  the  divine  reason  and  essence  on  the  one  hand, 
and  on  the  other  with  God's  principle  of  activity  and  revelation,  which 
manifests  itself  in  creation  and  the  soul  of  man.  Thus  Jesus  was  different 
in  nature  from  the  men  around  him.  A  mysterious  halo  is  about  his 
person.  In  all  his  words  and  deeds  a  glory  shines  out.  He  manifests 
his  glory  by  miracles,  which  are  signs  (o-T^/ieia,  2:12;  9:3;  12:4) — exhibi- 
tions primarily  not  of  compassion  but  of  power,  designed  to  inspire  belief 
in  his  claims  (4:48;  9:3;  11:40).  Where  there  is  dependence  on  the 
synoptists,  the  marvelous  is  chosen  and  heightened.  About  his  presence 
there  is  an  overawing  majesty  (7:46;  18:6).  It  is  one  who  came  forth 
from  God  and  returns  to  Grod  that  washes  the  disciples'  feet  (13:3).  By 
nature  they  were  his  servants,  but  in  his  divine  love  and  condescension  he 
calls  them  friends  (16:15).  He  is  self-determining,  independent  of  out- 
ward circumstances  and  compulsion,  master  of  his  own  fate  (7:30;  8:20; 
10:18).  His  words  are  divine  (6:63,  68;  15:3).  With  the  Logos-hj'poth- 
esis  there  is  no  need  of  adducing  the  tradition  of  the  virgin-birth  (cf.  i  :45; 
6:42;    7:27). 

3.  Gnosticism. — The  presence  of  incipient  Gnostics  in  Asia  Minor 
in  the  first  century  is  vdtnessed  by  the  epistles  to  the  Colossians  and  the 

1  De  Miindi  Opif.  51;   Conf.  Ling.  28. 

2  Conf.  Ling.    14.  3  Quid  Rer.  Div.  39;   De  Profug.  25. 

102 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  103 

Ephesians.  Their  large  influence  there  early  in  the  second  centur}'  is 
testified  to  by  the  zeal  of  Ignatius.  The  Fourth  Gospel  makes  no  express 
mention  of  Gnosticism,  but  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  it  was  present 
to  the  mind  of  the  author.  Emphasis  on  certain  physical  details  which 
prove  the  rcahty  of  Christ's  life  and  especially  of  his  death;  the  avoidance 
of  the  substantives  yvwcris  and  mo-ris,  though  the  ideas  and  the  verbal 
forms  ever  recur,  o-o<^ta  also  being  replaced  by  dAiJ^eia;  the  comparative 
absence  of  angels;  the  honor  paid  the  Old  Testament  as  foreshadowing 
the  revelation  in  Jesus;  the  exclusion  from  a  part  in  creation  of  the  mediat- 
ing aeons  of  gnostic  mythology  (1:3);  special  mention  that  Jesus  "went 
out  bearing  the  cross  for  himself"  (19:17),  the  gnostic  legend  being  that 
Simon  of  Cyrene  was  crucified  in  place  of  Jesus — these  facts  taken  all 
together  point  toward  a  conscious  opposition  to  Gnosticism  on  the  part 
of  the  writer.  Loyal  to  the  church's  evangelic  tradition,  he  insists  that 
Christianity  be  not  detached  from  its  original  and  vital  connection  with  the 
person  of  the  historical  Jesus.  He  is  satisfied  with  no  Logos  of  bare  specu- 
lation, but  with  one  known  in  personal  human  form. 

But  like  every  wise  apologete  for  the  faith,  John  is  sympathetic  and 
receptive  toward  the  deeper  thought-currents  of  the  time,  and  careful  to 
appropriate  and  conserve  what  is  true  and  helpful.  On  this  account  his 
work  became  a  favorite  gospel  of  gnostic  schools.  At  the  close  of  the 
second  century  it  was  even  said  that  Cerinthus  was  its  author.  The  docetic 
Gospel  of  Peter  follows  it  in  preference  to  the  Synoptics.  It  cannot  be 
denied  that  in  tendency  it  is  at  times  almost  docetic.  The  doctrine  of  a 
present  resurrection  is  close  to  gnostic  thought  (5:24).  The  antitheses 
of  the  lower  and  the  higher  worlds,  darkness  and  light,  earthly  men  and 
spiritual  men,  are  fundamental.  The  religious  life  is  one  of  knowing, 
though  knowledge  always  includes  ethical  elements.  It  is  evident  that 
the  distinction  between  orthodox  and  gnostic  had  not  become  marked. 
Later  Christians  often  combated  only  special  fantastic  forms  of  Gnosticism, 
not  understanding  its  real  spirit.  But  John  and  the  Gnostics  drew  in  part 
from  a  common  source — the  general  reUgious  culture  of  the  age.  The 
saving  work  of  Christ  must  be  brought  into  relation  with  the  needs  of  the 
Greek  world;  hence  he  is  conceived  as  one  who  brings  illumination  and 
eternal  life.  To  know  God  is  all-important,  but  this  is  to  know  his  char- 
acter and  will.  Christ  reveals  the  Father  by  the  manifestation  of  himself. 
He  was  more  than  a  messenger  come  to  bear  \\'itness  of  the  light;  he  was 
the  light  (1:7-9,  18).  The  acceptation  of  this  revelation  brings  eternal 
life  and  its  rejection  eternal  death.  Christianity  is  new  knowledge.  The 
Fourth  Gospel  thus  fostered  the  tendency  in  the  church  toward  an  intel- 

103 


104  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

lectual  apprehension  of  Christianity.     Faith,  however,  is  still  an  act  of  the 
soul — not  yet  "the  faith,"  but  approaching  that. 

Eschatology. — Perhaps  there  is  no  feature  of  the  Johannine  reinter- 
pretation  of  Christ  more  remarkable  than  the  transformation  of  the  current 
eschatology.  Most  vital  to  John  was  his  consciousness  of  the  presence 
of  the  living  Christ.  For  this  he  reads  history  symbolically  and  finds  in  it 
prophetic  allusions.  Expectation  of  the  parousia,  a  cardinal  article  of 
faith  in  the  primitive  church,  had  through  all  these  years  undergone  a 
severe  strain.  Some  clung  to  the  hope  aknost  frantically,  staking  every- 
thing, as  it  were,  upon  it;'  but  all  in  some  degree  maintained  the  hope. 
John  holds,  on  the  other  hand,  that  it  has  already  taken  place.  Christ 
comes  to  the  believer  inwardly  and  spiritually  (14:21-23).  He  said  he 
would  come  in  a  little  while,  and  he  fulfilled  his  promise  immediately  after 
the  ascension  to  the  Father.  And  so  the  discourses  at  the  Supper  take 
the  place  of  the  apocalyptic  discourses  of  the  Synoptics,  and  the  coming 
of  Christ  in  the  Spirit  is  substituted  for  the  parousia.  This  seems  very 
simple,  but  there  is  confessedly  some  confusion.  The  future  advent  of 
21:22  ("till  I  come")  belongs  to  the  appendix.  The  future  coming  of 
5:25,  28,  29  seems  to  be  a  contradiction  of  the  context,  and  the  last  two 
verses  look  like  an  interpolation.  The  meaning  of  14:3  seems  to  be  a 
coming  at  death  to  take  the  believer  to  a  heavenly  abode.  Possibly  there  is 
reference  to  the  appearances  after  the  resurrection  in  16 :  16,  22.  But  the  pre- 
vaihng  reference  to  his  coming  in  the  Spirit  is  unmistakable  (14: 18,  23,  28). 

The  resurrection  of  Jesus  effected  the  confirmation  of  the  disciples' 
faith  in  him  (20:8,  28),  and  the  possibility  of  his  return  to  the  Father  to 
send  the  Spirit.  His  resurrection  secured  to  believers  a  universal,  inward, 
permanent  divine  presence.  There  was  no  clear  place  for  the  ascension, 
such  as  is  described  in  Acts,  but  as  belonging  to  the  tradition  it  is  referred 
to  in  20:17. 

Paul  taught  that  the  Christian  man  has  already  experienced  a  spiritual 
resurrection.  This  is  with  John  a  cardinal  conviction;  Christ  imparts 
spiritual  life,  and  the  believer  in  him  has  already  passed  out  of  death  into 
life  (5:21,  24).  Martha's  idea  of  the  resurrection  was  eschatological  and 
physical;  Jesus  transfers  the  emphasis  to  the  present  (11:24-26).  But 
the  traditional  belief  in  a  final  resurrection  which  is  to  include  those  that 
have  done  evil  is  not  excluded  (5:28,  29;   6:39,  40,  44,  54). 

In  the  traditional  messianism  Christ  was  to  be  judge  (H  Cor.  5:10). 
John  carries  the  messianic  judgment  back  into  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus 

I  Apoc.  of  John;  Apoc.  of  Peter;  Papias  (Iran.,  Haer.  5:33);  II  Peter,  "Where 
is  the  promise  of  his  parousia?"  (3:4). 

104 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  105 

(5:22,  27,  30;  8:16;  9:39;  12:31).  Again  it  is  said  that  he  does  not 
judge;  he  came  to  save  (3:17;  5:45;  8:15;  12:47).  His  judgment  is 
not  formal;  he  has  come  into  the  world  as  the  light,  the  revelation  of  God, 
and  light  brings  all  things  to  the  test  (3 :  18-21).  Men  choose  for  or  against 
him.  The  word  he  speaks  judges  (12:47,  4^)-  ^^  ^  matter  of  course 
the  judgment  "in  the  last  day"  also  appears  (5:28,  29;   12:48). 

Summing  up,  we  may  view  the  Christology  of  the  Fourth  Gospel  in 
Christ's  relation  to  God,  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  to  men. 

The  title  "the  Christ"  has  for  the  most  part  lost  its  original  significance 
in  connection  with  the  national  Israelitish  history  and  hope,  and  like  "the 
Son  of  God"  has  come  to  stand  for  the  supramundane  nature  and  dignity 
of  Jesus  (11:27;  20:31).  "Son  of  man"  occurs  in  twelve  passages,  but 
in  most  cases  it  takes  strained  exegesis  to  find  special  significance  in  its 
use,  as  for  instance  the  emphatic  acknowledgment  on  the  part  of  Jesus  of  a 
human  nature.  The  distinctive  name  is  "Son  of  God,"  sometimes  with 
the  Philonic  epithet  of  "only-begotten"  (1:14,  18;  3:16,  18).  This 
sonship  is  literal  and  essential;  Christ  is  a  heavenly  being,  different  in 
kind  from  men.  He  shared  the  glory  of  the  Father  before  the  world  was, 
and  by  his  own  act  entered  the  world  as  man;  hence  there  is  no  need  to 
introduce  the  tradition  of  the  virgin-birth.  As  pictured  by  the  synoptists 
Jesus  fixed  his  thought  on  God's  fatherliness,  his  own  sonship  being  a 
correlative,  to  be  sure,  but  in  the  background.  Father  and  Son  implied  a 
reciprocal  fellowship;  as  in  Hebrew  thought,  the  son  was  the  object  of 
the  Father's  favor,  and  the  name  was  more  personal  than  official.  In  the 
Fourth  Gospel,  however,  both  Fatherhood  and  Sonship  approach  a  literal 
relationship.  Of  course  sonship  implies  a  distinction  and  a  subordination 
(5:19;  12:50;  14:28).  J.  Weiss  is  in  error  when  he  says  of  John  that  "he 
does  not  even  hesitate  not  only  to  say  of  the  premundane  Logos:  he  was 
God  (1:1),  but  also  lets  the  bodily  risen  one  be  addressed  by  Thomas  as 
his  God  (20 :  28)."'  These  are  isolated  instances,  and  the  first  is  not  correctly 
translated,  while  the  second  is  an  exclamation,  found  in  reverse  order  in 
Ps.  35:23. 

Nevertheless  there  is  an  equally  vital  ethical  and  religious  side  to  John's 
Christology.  He  does  not  entirely  forget  that  Jesus  was  a  man  with  genu- 
inely human  and  moral  traits.  Jesus  revealed  God  perfectly  to  men 
because  in  him  was  realized  an  ideal  communion  witii  the  Father  (14 : 9,  10). 
His  life  and  character  made  known  God  to  men.  Fie  is  Son  of  God  by 
virtue  of  his  inner  life  of  fellowship,  his  obedience  to  the  will  of  God,  his 
love  and  devotion  expressing  itself  in  self-sacrifice  (4 :  34 ;  5:30;  8:29;  10: 
I  Chrislus:   Die  Anfdnge  des  Dogmas,  S.  85,  86. 

105 


106  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

17,  37).  The  communion  of  the  disciples  with  Jesus  and  of  Jesus  with  the 
Father  are  placed  side  by  side  as  though  they  were  of  the  same  kind.  Even 
for  Jesus,  fellowship  with  God  is  conditioned ;  he  is  assured  of  the  love  of 
the  Father  only  so  long  as  he  does  his  will.  By  this  apprehension  of  the 
historical  Jesus  the  moral  element  that  was  threatened  under  the  influence 
of  the  doctrine  of  an  abstract  Logos  is  restored. 

The  death  of  Jesus  made  possible  his  return  to  the  disciples  as  an  all- 
pervading  presence  for  the  larger  task  of  gathering  together  into  one  the 
children  of  God  that  are  scattered  abroad  (7:39;  10:16;  11:52,  17:20,21). 
Bereft  of  his  bodily  presence,  the  disciples  will  have  the  Spirit.  Now  the 
conception  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  a  phase  of  primitive  Christian  thought 
of  which  John  found  it  convenient  to  make  special  use.  In  certain  passages 
the  Spirit  is  expressly  distinguished  from  Jesus  (oAXos  TrapaKXryTos,  14:16, 
26;  15:26;  16:7,  14,  15),  while  in  others  the  reference  is  to  the  presence 
of  the  glorified  Redeemer  (14:18;  16:16).  After  his  resurrection  Jesus 
breathed  on  the  disciples  and  said:  "Receive  the  Holy  Spirit"  (20:22). 
The  confusion  at  this  point  is  paralleled  in  every  phase  of  the  Johannine 
thought  we  have  taken  up,  and  is  dissolved  when  we  recall  the  varying 
influences  and  interests  with  which  our  many-sided  author  had  to  reckon. 

In  relation  to  men  it  is  the  function  of  Jesus  to  disclose  the  mystery  of 
the  unseen  God  (1:18;  14:9),  to  bring  grace  and  truth  (1:14,  17),  and  to 
impart  eternal  Ufe.  He  is  the  Water  and  Bread  of  life,  the  Light,  the  Way, 
the  Shepherd,  the  Vine.  It  is  not  to  his  message  but  to  himself  that  men 
are  to  look  for  salvation.  In  his  discourses  he  does  not  teach,  but  asserts 
his  divine  character — his  self-consciousness — his  relation  to  God  and 
men.  The  eternal  life  which  he  imparts  is  thought  of  in  its  essence  after 
the  manner  of  the  Greeks,  and  in  its  ethical  quality  in  the  Hebrew  spirit. 
The  means  by  which  men  come  to  partake  of  eternal  life  is  union  with  Christ, 
so  intimate  that  prayer  may  be  addressed  immediately  to  God  (16:23,  24), 
mystically  grounded  on  an  almost  ontological  relationship,  ethically  based 
on  spiritual  fellowship.  The  continuity  of  this  divine  life  is  such  that  death 
— the  dissolution  of  the  body — is  but  an  incident. 

The  Fourth  Gospel  is  then  an  interpretation  of  Jesus — a  setting-forth  of 
his  significance  for  the  world.  It  is  not  to  be  taken  as  historical  in  form 
and  detail.  As  an  interpretation,  however,  its  main  contentions  are  not 
without  support  in  the  synoptic  tradition.  Love  as  the  distinguishing  mark 
of  discipleship  finds  even  larger  expression  in  the  synoptic  account,  while 
love  as  the  central  trait  in  the  character  of  God  in  his  relation  to  men  finds 
place  in  the  message  of  Jesus  as  recorded  in  the  Synoptic  Gospels  (John 
3:16;   13:34,35;  Mark  12:30,  31;  Matt.  5:43-48).     The  total  impression 

106 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  107 

of  his  life  and  character,  his  words  and  deeds,  gained  from  the  Synoptic 
Gosf^els,  is  that  of  one  who  reveals  God,  and  that  Christ  manifests  God 
is  the  fundamental  conviction  of  the  author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel.  In 
the  synoptic  account  the  person  of  Jesus  does  not  stand  out  so  prominently 
as  the  source  of  salvation,  but  Jesus  does  invite  the  weary  and  heavy  laden 
to  come  to  him  for  refreshment  and  does  represent  his  body  and  blood  as 
given  for  his  followers.  He  does  not  in  the  Synoptics  ask  for  belief  that 
he  is  the  Son  of  God,  who  has  come  from  heaven,  but  he  does  say:  "Follow 
me"  (Mark  1:17).  Now  what  kind  of  a  being  must  he  be  of  whom  such 
things  can  be  said  ?  It  is  with  this  problem  that  the  Fourth  Gospel  deals. 
John's  conviction  of  the  divine  sonship  of  Jesus  finds  support  in  the  synop- 
tic tradition  (Mark  i:ii;  9:7;  Matt.  11:27).  From  the  beginning  his 
followers  had  attempted  to  answer  the  question,  but  former  categories 
and  interpretations  did  not  fully  satisfy  John's  experience  and  view  of  the 
world.  The  profound  answer  he  himself  has  given  is  not  surpassed  by 
any  thinker  of  the  primitive  Christian  period. 

THE   JOHANNINE   EPISTLES 

There  is  little  reference  in  these  epistles  to  the  historical  Jesus — his 
message  that  God  is  light,  his  command  to  love,  the  mention  of  water  and 
blood  and  of  "the  teaching  of  the  Christ"  (i : 5;  3:11,  23;  5:6;  II  John, 
vs.  9)  being  the  possible  allusions. 

As  in  the  gospel,  Christ  is  primarily  the  Revealer  of  the  Father,  and  the 
Christian  character  corresponds  with  God's  character  ("which  thing  is  true 
in  him  and  in  you,"  2:8;  4:11,  etc.).  There  is  the  same  strange  combina- 
tion of  opposites:  the  teaching  is  now  mystical,  now  intellectualistic,  and 
yet  so  ethical  that  Christianity  appears  to  be  only  a  fulfiknent  of  the  law 
of  love.  J.  Weiss'  says  that  Jesus  Christ  is  "without  hesitation"  called 
"the  true  God"  in  5:20,  but  the  case  is  not  so  clear;  further,  it  is  possible 
that  the  closing  verses  are  a  later  amplification. 

The  explicit  connection  of  the  death  of  Christ  with  sin  is  more  promi- 
nent than  in  the  gospel.  "The  blood  of  Jesus  his  Son  cleanses  us  from 
all  sin"  (1:7).  "And  he  is  a  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for  ours  only 
but  also  for  the  whole  world  "  (IXaa-fioq,  2:2).  Their  sins  are  forgiven  for 
his  name's  sake — an  expression  not  frequent  in  the  New  Testament  (2:12). 
"  He  was  manifested  to  take  away  sins  and  in  him  is  no  sin"  (3:5).  "  In 
this  is  love,  not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that  he  loved  us  and  sent  his  Son 
as  a  propitiation  for  our  sins"  (4: 10). 

As  in  the  gospel,  the  e.xpectation  of  a  final  bodily  resurrection  is  sub- 
ordinated to  the  present  spiritual  resurrection  of  believers  (2:29;    3:14; 

'  Christus,  S.  84. 

107 


108  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

5:12).  But  the  coming  manifestation  of  Christ  occupies  a  place  that  is 
not  given  it  in  the  gospel  (2:28;  3:2).  The  "last  hour,"  which  has  already 
arrived,  as  is  vritnessed  by  the  rise  of  many  antichrists,  and  "the  day  of 
judgment,"  are  mentioned  (2:18;  4:17).  Paul's  doctrine  of  Christ  as  an 
ever-living  Intercessor  (Rom.  8:34),  elaborated  in  Hebrews  (7:25),  is  here 
continued  in  the  thought  of  an  Advocate  with  the  Father  {TrapaK\-qTo<;  irph-i 
Tov  irarepa,  2:1),  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous. 

Of  special  interest  is  the  explicit  reference  to  gnostic  teachers,  who 
were  only  implicitly  present  in  the  gospel.  We  learn  that  they  are  numer- 
ous, are  itinerant  preachers;  they  originally  went  out  from  the  Christian 
community;  the  separation  now  between  them  and  the  churches  is  an 
open  one,  and  its  initiation  was  not  from  the  side  of  the  false  leaders  but 
the  churches  (2:18,  19;  4:4;  II  John,  vss.  7,  10).  They  have  met 
with  a  measure  of  success:  "the  world  hears  them"  (4:5).  The  author 
sees  in  them  the  expected  antichrists  (2:18,  22;  4:3;  II  John,  vs.  7). 
They  are  not  to  be  received  into  the  house  or  greeted,  for  greeting  would 
mean  participation  in  their  evil  works  (II  John,  vss.  10,  11). 

Their  chief  offense  is  their  false  Christology:  the  denial  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ  and  the  denial  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  (2:22;  4:2,  3;  5:1, 
5-8;  II  John,  vss.  7-9).  The  docetic  error  is  apparent  enough.  There  is 
also  the  contention  on  their  part  that  the  union  between  the  Christ  and  the 
man  Jesus  was  only  transitory  and  external,  beginning  with  the  baptism 
and  closing  with  the  sufferings.^  In  opposition  to  this  the  author  asserts 
that  Jesus  Christ  came  not  only  with  the  water  but  with  the  water  and  the 
blood,  that  is  to  say,  not  only  in  baptism  but  in  suffering  (5:6,  8).  With 
this  interpretation  agree  the  opening  words  to  the  effect  that  the  Word  of 
life  was  heard,  seen,  and  handled  (i :  1-3).  The  textual  reading  of  Xvet  in 
4:3  instead  of  /x^  ofioXoyd  is  significant:  whoever  divides  the  historical 
person  of  Jesus  is  not  of  God.  The  denial  that  Christ  has  suffered  with 
and  for  men  robs  his  death  of  significance  (1:7;  2:2;  4:10).  Another 
error  is  that  of  antinomianism — the  contention  that  the  Christian  man  is 
bound  by  no  law  (1:8,  10;   2:4). 

Our  author  is  not  content  to  denounce  and  condemn,  like  Jude,  Second 

Peter,  and  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  but  he  exhibits  the  true  gospel  in  opposition 

to  the  false  gnosis.    With  the  gospel  of  the  same  school  he  insists  upon  the 

reality  of  Christ's  appearance  in  the  flesh,  demands  obedience  as  well  as 

knowledge,  and  employs  the  categories  of  light,  life,  and   love.     It  is  a 

striking  fact  that  there  is  no  direct  allusion  to  the  Old  Testament. 

I  It  is  this  docetic  interpretation  of  Jesus  that  appears  in  the  Gospel  of  Peter: 
"  And  the  Lord  cried  out  and  said:  My  power,  my  power,  thou  hast  forsaken  me.  And 
when  he  had  said  it,  he  was  taken  up." 

108 


XII.     THE  IGNATIAN  CHRISTOLOGY 

The  seven  genuine  letters  of  Ignatius''  and  the  letter  of  Polycarp  to  the 
Philippians  were  written  either  during  the  latter  part  of  Trajan's  reign,' 
or  during  that  of  Hadrian  (117-38  a.  d.).3  These  letters  present  an 
interesting  contrast  from  a  christological  standpoint,  and  those  of  Ignatius 
mark  the  beginnings  of  a  new  type  of  Christology. 

I.      POLYCARP 

The  epistle  of  Polycarp  to  the  Philippians  was  occasioned  by  a  com- 
munication from  the  Philippian  church  to  Polycarp,  requesting  that  he 
convey  to  Syria  a  letter  they  had  written  at  Ignatius'  suggestion,  and  asking 
also  that  he  send  them  any  of  Ignatius'  letters  he  might  have,  as  well  as 
a  letter  from  himself  for  their  edification  (3:1,  13).  Polycarp  wrote  to 
them  simply,  practically,  and  temperately.  Most  striking  is  his  large  use 
of  the  New  Testament  books.  The  repeated  use  of  First  Peter  attracted 
the  attention  of  Eusebius.^  Great  value  attached  to  the  words  of  Jesus, 
which  are  introduced  as  in  First  Clement  with  the  formula:  "The  Lord 
said"  (2:3;  7:2).  Paul  is  referred  to  by  name,  especially  in  connection 
with  the  fact  that  in  person  he  taught  the  Philippians  carefully  and  surely 
and  when  absent  wrote  them  a  letter  (or  "letters,"  cTrto-roAas) .  In  one 
instance  the  words  of  Paul  are  quoted  as  from  sacred  Scriptures  (12:1: 
"sacris  Uteris  ....  his  scripturis"),  but  part  of  the  quotation  is  from  the 
Old  Testament  (Ps.  4:5;  Eph.  4:26),  which  Polycarp  probably  had  in 
mind. 

Although  he  is  not  animated  with  the  dogmatic  spirit  of  the  fiery  Igna- 
tius, yet  he  takes  occasion  to  warn  against  prevailing  false  doctrine.  Ever 
prone  to  regard  matter  as  the  source  of  evil,  gnostic  teachers  denied  that 
Christ  entered  into  actual  contact  with  earthly  things;  his  coming  in  the 
flesh  and  his  suffering  and  death  were  illusory.  The  resurrection  of 
believers  was  spiritual  only.  Turning  from  these  false  teachings  to  the 
word  delivered  from  the  beginning,  Polycarp  declares:  "For  everyone  who 
does  not  confess  that  Jesus  Christ  has  come  in  the  flesh  is  Antichrist,  and 

I  It  is  to  be  noted  that  P&eidereT  (Urchristentum,  II,  ,S.  227),  although  he  had, 
along  with  the  Tubingen  critics,  opposed  the  genuineness  of  these  letters,  later  ac- 
knowledged that  Lightfoot  had  convinced  him  of  their  genuineness. 

'  Euseb.,  H.  E.  3:36. 

3  The  traditional  date  is  107;  Lightfoot  gives  no,  Harnack  117,  Pfleiderer  130. 

4  H.  E.  4:15:    KdxPV''''^  ■'■'<'■'  fJ-apTvplaii  d7r6  rijs  Hirpov  irpor^pas  iiriffTo'KTJs. 
109]  109 


110  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

whoever  confesses  not  the  testimony  of  the  cross  is  of  the  devil,  and  who- 
ever perverts  the  oracles  of  the  Lord  to  his  own  desires  and  says  that 
there  is  neither  resurrection  nor  judgment,  that  man  is  the  firstborn  of 
Satan"  (7:1). 

The  language  used  of  Christ  is  in  general  that  of  the  traditional  Christol- 
ogy  (2:1,  2).  As  in  First  Peter  and  Clement,  the  example  of  the  Lord 
is  appealed  to  in  an  ethical  manner  (2:2,  3).  Christ  is  most  frequently 
called  "our  Lord;"  once,  as  in  Hebrews,  "the  eternal  high  priest"  (12:2: 
sempiternus  pontifex  for  6  atwvtos  d/oxtepev?).  If  we  follow  the  quota- 
tions in  Timothcus  and  Severus  instead  of  the  Latin  there  is  a  reference  to 
the  "God  Jesus  Christ"  in  12:2,  after  the  style  of  Ignatius;  and  farther 
on  in  the  same  passage  there  is  similar  language  according  to  a  not  improb- 
able Latin  reading. 

It  is  in  line  with  a  tendency  of  the  time  that  the  Christian  prophets 
are  ignored,  and  appeal  is  made  to  the  Lord  himself  who  gave  command- 
ment, the  apostles  who  preached  the  gospel,  and  the  prophets  who  pro- 
claimed beforehand  the  coming  of  our  Lord  (6:3). 

II.      IGNATIUS 

Circumstances  connected  with  his  approaching  martj-Tdom  occasioned 
the  seven  genuine  letters  of  Ignatius  that  we  possess.  He  has  been  con- 
demned to  the  wild  beasts,  on  what  definite  charge  is  not  known  to  us, 
and  the  Flavian  amphitheater  is  the  appointed  place  of  execution.  At 
the  time  of  his  departure  for  Rome  the  peace  of  his  Antiochene  church  is 
disturbed.  On  his  Romeward  journey  he  is  in  the  custody  of  ten  soldiers, 
"leopards,"  who  treat  him  vrith  harshness.  On  reaching  Smyrna  he 
receives  delegates  from  churches  of  Asia  Minor.  Four  of  his  letters  written 
from  this  place  are  extant.  Those  addressed  to  the  Ephesians,  Alagnesians, 
and  Trallians,  who  had  sent  delegates  to  him  at  Smyrna,  have  to  do  with 
doctrine  and  ecclesiastical  order.  The  fourth,  that  to  the  Romans,  written 
on  the  twenty-fourth  of  August,  is  occupied  with  the  thought  of  his  coming 
martyrdom.  He  fears  that  his  friends  will  interpose  in  his  behalf,  and 
thereby  inflict  a  wound  upon  him.  Here  his  fierce  enthusiasm  reaches 
its  highest  point.  He  longs  for  the  honor  of  discipleship  which  martyrdom 
will  confer  upon  him.  He  is  wheat  of  God,  and  is  ground  by  the  teeth  of 
wild  beasts,  so  as  to  be  found  pure  bread  of  the  Christ  (4:1).  From  Troas 
he  writes  three  letters.  The  first  and  second  are  addressed  to  the  churches 
of  Philadelphia  and  Smyrna,  which  he  had  visited  personally  on  the  route; 
the  third  is  to  Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna.  Having  heard  that  peace  has 
been  restored  in  the  church  at  Antioch,  he  desires  that  the  churches  with 

110 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY.  Ill 

which  he  communicates  and  Polycarp  send  delegates  or  letters  to  Syria  to 
congratulate  and  exhort  the  Antiochene  brotherhood. 

Ignatius  is  tremendously  impressed  with  the  fact  that  the  churches  are 
confronted  with  a  real  danger  from  false  doctrine.  Doctrinal  purity,  the 
unity  of  the  faith,  is  to  be  secured  by  strict  ecclesiastical  order,  of  which 
the  bishop  is  the  center;  this  is  urged  in  every  letter.  Everywhere  it  is 
apparent  that  it  is  a  thoroughgoing  docetism  against  which  his  teaching 
is  directed,  such  as  is  dealt  with  in  the  epistle  to  the  Colossians,  the  Johan- 
nine  epistles  and  gospel,  and  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  Before  the  mind  of 
Ignatius  is  a  particular  form  of  Judaistic  Gnosticism.  Now  we  know 
that  Antioch  was  a  center  of  gnostic  syncretism.  Saturninus,  a  native 
of  Antioch  who  flourished  100-120  A.  d.,  taught  that  Christ  was  without 
birth,  body,  or  figure,  appearing  in  semblance  as  a  man.  Basilides  flourished 
during  the  reign  of  Hadrian;  he  was  educated  in  Syria  and  the  East,  and 
taught  in  Alexandria.  It  was  his  contention  that  Simon  the  Cyrenian  was 
crucified,  by  a  trick  or  magic,  instead  of  Jesus.' 

A  few  passages  from  Ignatius  will  suffice  to  show  how  he  meets  these 
errors.  Against  phantasmal  conceptions  he  urges  the  word  a.XrjOSt'i.  The 
birth,  passion,  and  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  truly  and  assuredly  took 
place  in  the  time  of  the  governorship  of  Pontius  Pilate.^ 

Be  deaf,  therefore,  when  any  man  speaks  to  you  apart  from  Jesus  Christ, 
who  was  of  the  race  of  David,  the  son  of  Mary,  who  was  truly  bom  and  ate  and 
drank,  was  truly  persecuted  under  Pondus  Pilate,  was  truly  crucified  and  died 
in  the  sight  of  those  in  heaven  and  on  earth  and  under  the  earth;  who  was  also 
truly  raised  from  the  dead,  his  Father  having  raised  him;  and  he  will  in  like 
manner  raise  us  who  believe  on  him — that  is,  his  Father  will  raise  us  in  Christ 
Jesus,  apart  from  whom  we  have  no  true  life.  But  if  it  were  as  certain  persons 
who  are  godless,  that  is  unbelievers,  say,  that  he  seemed  to  suffer,  being  themselves 
the  seeming,  why  am  I  bound,  and  why  also  do  I  desire  to  fight  with  wild  beasts  ? 
So  I  die  in  vain;   accordingly  then  I  lie  against  the  Lord. 3 

To  the  Smyrnaeans  he  writes: 

I  glorify  Jesus  Christ  the  God  who  bestowed  such  wisdom  upon  you;  for  I 
have  perceived  that  you  are  established  in  immovable  faith,  nailed  as  it  were  on 
the  cross  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  both  in  flesh  and  spirit,  settled  in  love  in  the 
blood  of  Christ,  fully  persuaded  with  reference  to  our  Lord  that  he  is  truly  of  the 
race  of  David  according  to  the  flesh,  Son  of  God  according  to  the  will  and  power 
of  God,  bom  tmly  of  a  virgin,  baptized  by  John  that  all  righteousness  might  be 
fulfilled  by  him,  tmly  nailed  up  in  the  flesh  for  our  sakes  under  Pontius  Pilate 
and  Herod  the  tetrarch — of  which  fruit  are  we,  of  his  most  blessed  passion— that 

'  Iren.,  Haer.  1:24:4. 

»  Mag.  II.  3Tral.  g,  10. 

Ill 


112  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

he  might  raise  a  signal  unto  the  ages  through  the  resurrection  for  his  saints  and 
faithful  ones,  whether  among  Jews  or  among  gentiles,  in  one  body  of  his  church. 
For  he  suffered  all  these  things  for  our  sakes,  that  we  might  be  saved;  and  he 
suffered  truly,  as  he  also  truly  raised  himself  (an  unusual  expression),  not  as 
some  unbelievers  say,  that  he  seemed  to  suffer,  being  themselves  the  seeming; 
and  as  they  think,  it  shall  also  happen  to  them,  because  they  are  bodyless  and 
demoniacal.  For  I  know  and  believe  that  he  was  in  the  flesh  even  after  the 
resurrection.  And  when  he  came  to  those  who  were  about  Peter,  he  said  to 
them:  Take,  handle  me  and  see  that  I  am  not  a  bodyless  demon.  And  instantly 
they  touched  him  and  beUeved,  holding  to  his  flesh  and  spirit.  Wherefore  they 
also  despised  death,  moreover  were  found  superior  to  death.  And  after  the 
resurrection  he  ate  with  them  and  drank  with  them  as  sarkical,  though  he  was 
spiritually  united  with  the  Father  (1-3). 

We  are  constantly  coming  upon  the  most  striking  and  startling  expres- 
sions. He  delights  in  speaking  of  "Jesus  Christ  our  God."  He  mentions 
"the  blood  of  God"  (Eph.,  chap,  i)  and  "the  passion  of  my  God"  (Rom. 
6:3).  "Our  God  Jesus  the  Christ  was  conceived  in  the  womb  by  Mary" 
(18:2).  "Even  the  heavenly  beings  and  the  glory  of  the  angels  and  the 
rulers  both  visible  and  invisible"  are  under  the  necessity  of  believing  in 
Christ's  blood  for  salvation.^  False  teachers  appealed  to  the  archives — 
doubtless  chiefly  the  Old  Testament  scriptures.  Ignatius  is  veiling  to  quote 
what  is  written,  but  adds:  "But  as  for  me,  my  archives  are  Jesus  Christ; 
the  inviolable  archives  are  his  cross  and  death  and  his  resurrection  and 
the  faith  which  is  through  him"  (Phil.  8:2).  Jesus  Christ  is  the  "door 
of  the  Father,"  through  which  prophets  and  apostles  and  the  church  enter 
(Phil.  9:1).  "There  is  one  God  who  manifested  himself  through  Jesus 
Christ  his  Son,  who  is  his  word  proceeding  from  silence,  who  in  all  things 
pleased  him  that  sent  him."^ 

The  prophets  in  whom  Ignatius  believes  are  those  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment.    "For  the  divine  prophets  lived  according  to  Christ  Jesus.     For 

this  cause  also  they  were  persecuted,  being  inspired  by  his  grace 

Even  the  prophets,  being  his  disciples  in  the  spirit,  were  expecting  him  as 
their  teacher;  and  on  this  account  he  whom  they  rightly  awaited,  when  he 
came,  raised  them  from  the  dead. "3 

"Wherever  the  bishop  appears,  there  let  the  multitude  be;  just  as 
wherever  Christ  Jesus  is,  there  is  the  universal  church. "^ 

The  contrast  between  these  two  contemporaries  and  friends,  Polycarp 
and  Ignatius,  is  striking  throughout.     In  Polycarp  there  is  no  mention  of 

'Smyr.  6:1.  3  Mag.  8:  2;  9:3. 

"  Mag.  8:2.  •  4  Smyr.  8:2:    ^  kclOoKik^  iKK\ri(rla. 

112 


OUTLINE    OP    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHBISTOLOGY  113 

the  episcopate,  though  in  Ignatius  it  constitutes  the  guarantee  of  orthodoxy 
and  unity.  In  Polycarp  there  is  no  word  about  the  unity  of  the  church, 
the  only  occurrence  of  iKKkyja-ia  being  in  the  address.  Ignatius  turned  to 
large  practical  use  the  PauUne  thought  of  the  oneness  of  the  church  as  the 
body  of  Christ. 

Ignatius  is  akin  to  Paul  on  the  mystical  side,  especially  in  his  emphasis 
upon  the  union  of  the  believer  with  Christ.  Polycarp's  Ukeness  to  Paul  is 
on  the  practical  and  ethical  side;  his  letter  resembles  First  Peter,  Clement, 
and  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  Ignatius  speaks  of  Jesus  Christ  and  Christ  Jesus ; 
Polycarp  of  the  Lord  and  our  Lord,  with  and  without  the  addition  of  Jesus 
Christ.  Three  times  in  Polycarp  we  read  of  "  God  and  Christ  "(3:3;  5:2, 
3) ;  not  at  all  in  Ignatius.  There  is  in  Polycarp  nothing  of  the  blood  and 
suflfering  of  God.  He  mentions  the  cross  of  Christ  twice  (7:1;  12:2)  in 
referring  to  enemies  of  the  true  faith,  and  the  blood  of  Christ  once  (2:1), 
as  a  crime  demanding  vengeance.  On  the  other  hand  Ignatius  lays  the 
greatest  stress  on  the  passion  and  death  of  Christ,  though  he  does  not 
develop  its  theological  significance,  as  Paul  attempted  to  do. 

Polycarp,  the  younger  man,  is  the  sane  and  conservative  representative 
of  the  apostolic  tradition;  Ignatius,  the  elder,  realizing  present  dangers 
and  looking  toward  the  future,  is  the  passionate  champion  of  the  new,  the 
pioneer  in  doctrine  and  polity,  masterful  in  personality  and  pre-eminent 
in  originality,  surpassed  only  in  his  generation  by  that  profound  religious 
genius  of  the  same  part  of  the  world  whose  spiritual  insight  into  the  char- 
acter of  Jesus  and  prevailing  religious  tendencies  brought  to  the  interpre- 
tation of  the  person  of  Christ  more  enduring  expression  in  the  Fourth 
Gospel. 


113 


XIII.      CHRISTOLOGY  IN  THE  EPISTLE  OF  BARNABAS 
AND  IN  LATER  WORKS 

I.     THE   EPISTLE   OF   BARNABAS 

The  Epistle  of  Barnabas  is  a  monument  of  Alexandrian  Christianity, 
The  eariiest  notices  of  it  are  found  in  the  Alexandrian  Fathers.  The  closing 
chapters  (18-21;  cre/ja  yvwo-is)  constitute  a  manual  of  Christian  conduct 
to  be  viewed  apart  from  the  rest  of  the  book,  both  internal  and  manuscript 
evidence  weighing  against  original  unity.  On  the  basis  of  chap.  4  Lightfoot 
would  date  the  work  in  Vespasian's  reign  (70-79  a.  d.),  but  the  allusion 
to  the  Roman  emperors  is  too  uncertain  and  elastic  for  the  fixing  of  the 
date.  Harnack  finds  in  chap.  16  a  reference  to  the  proposed  building  of 
the  heathen  temple  at  Jerusalem  under  Hadrian  in  130  or  131.  The 
allusion  is  doubtful,  but  this  later  date  comes  nearer  corresponding  to  the 
general  course  of  thought  in  the  epistle. 

The  most  striking  characteristic  of  the  epistle  is  the  author's  peculiar 
attitude  toward  Judaism  and  the  Old  Testament.  In  his  rejection  of 
Judaism  and  his  Christianizing  of  the  Old  Testament  he  stands  on  familiar 
orthodox  ground.  But  he  does  not  hold  with  the  author  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  that  historical  Judaism  was  a  divinely  ordained  and  prepara- 
tory stage  of  revelation.  For  Barnabas  it  was  a  perversion  of  true  religion 
due  to  an  entire  misunderstanding.  He  is  likewise  removed  from  the 
gnostic  opposition  between  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New,  as  though 
the  Old  Testament  were  the  work  of  another  and  lower  God  than  the  God 
of  Christianity.  Yet  he  approaches  that  position  more  nearly  than  orthodox 
Christian  writers  would  have  dared  in  a  later  time,  when  the  lines  were 
closely  drawn;  for  he  represents  that  the  practice  of  circumcision  was  due 
to  the  suggestion  of  an  evil  angel  (9:4).  Nevertheless  the  Old  Testament 
is  still  for  him  divine  revelation  and  is  quoted  throughout  as  authoritative. 
Only  it  is  so  thoroughly  Christianized  by  the  allegorical  method  familiar 
to  Alexandrians  that  the  spiritual  meaning  alone  is  left.  The  Jews  mis- 
understood the  law  and  the  prophets  from  beginning  to  end.  Sacrifice, 
circumcision,  the  distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  meats,  the  Sabbath, 
and  worship  in  a  material  temple  were  not  originally  intended  to  be  literally 
observed.  Commands  for  such  ordinances  were  uttered  in  a  spiritual 
sense. 

The  same  world  of  gnostic  thought  is  probably  presupposed,  as  stands 
uot  prominently  in  the  passionate  exhortations  and  denunciations  of 
114]  lU 


OUTLINE   OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  115 

Ignatius.  But  however  vigorously  they  might  protest  against  the  new  ideas, 
most  of  the  writers  who  came  in  contact  with  them  were  influenced  by 
them  and  in  a  measure  appropriated  them.  An  example  is  found  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  and  a  still  better  example  in  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
Now  the  same  is  true  of  Barnabas.  He  too  can  protest :  note  the  polemics 
against  esoteric  customs  and  other  errors  (4:10;  3:6;  4:6).  He  is  certainly 
not  a  docetist.  The  Son  of  God  really  came  and  suffered  in  the  flesh  (chap. 
5).  But  some  of  his  language  is  so  close  to  docetism  that  it  would  not  have 
been  kindly  received  by  the  church  at  a  somewhat  later  period,  as  the  follow- 
ing: "See  again  Jesus,  not  Son  of  man  but  Son  of  God,  yet  in  type  {tvttw) 
manifested  in  flesh.  Since  then  they  are  going  to  say  that  Christ  is  son 
of  David,  David  himself,  fearing  and  understanding  the  error  of  sinners, 
prophesies:     The  Lord  said  to  my  Lord:   Sit  on  my  right  hand  till  I  set 

thine  enemies  a  footstool  of  thy  feet See  how  David  calls  him  Lord 

and  does  not  call  him  son."^ 

The  passage,  "As  it  is  written.  Many  called  but  few  chosen,"  is  sup- 
posed to  mark  the  words  of  Jesus  as  Holy  Scripture  (4:14),  but  it  is  possible 
the  quotation  is  from  another  source,  and  w?  ycypaTrrai  may  be  employed 
in  a  more  general  sense.  The  thought  of  the  inspiration  of  Old  Testament 
prophets  by  Christ,  occurring  in  First  Peter,  Clement,  and  Ignatius,  appears 
here:  "The  prophets,  receiving  grace  from  him,  prophesied  concerning 
him"  (5:6).  As  Lord  of  all  the  world  he  was  consulted  by  God  in  the 
creation  of  man  (5:5). 

With  First  Peter  and  Ignatius,  following  Paul,  he  emphasizes  the  death 
of  Christ  as  a  means  of  redemption:  "For  to  this  end  the  Lord  endured  to 
deUver  his  flesh  to  corruption,  that  by  the  forgiveness  of  sins  we  might  be 

cleansed,  which  is  by  the  blood  of  his  sprinkling Now  he  himself 

endured  that  he  might  destroy  death  and  show  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead,  because  it  was  necessary  that  he  be  manifested  in  flesh,  that  he  might 
also  redeem  the  promise  made  to,  the  fathers  and  by  preparing  the  new 
people  for  himself  might  show,  while  he  was  on  the  earth,  that  having 
himself  brought  about  the  resurrection  he  will  judge"  (5:1,  6,  7).  He 
came  also  for  judgment  upon  those  who  slew  his  prophets  (5 :  11) — not  only 
a  familiar  messianic  thought,  but  also  in  another  way  a  prominent  Johannine 
conception.  The  doctrine  of  regeneration  appearing  in  First  Peter  and 
the  Johannine  writings  is  here  set  forth  repeatedly :  "  Since  then  he  renewed 
us  in  the  remission  of  sins,  he  made  us  another  type,  so  as  to  have  the  soul 
of  children,  as  if  he  were  creating  us  anew"  (6:11).  The  abode  of  our 
heart  is  a  holy  temple  to  the  Lord  (6:15).  "If  then  the  Son  of  God, 
"  12 :  10,  II ;  Pfleiderer,  Urchr.,  II,  S.  560,  562,  pushes  the  author's  words  too  far. 

115 


116  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

being  Lord  and  about  to  judge  living  and  dead,  suffered,  that  his  wound 
might  make  us  alive,  let  us  believe  that  the  Son  of  God  could  not  suffer 
except  for  bur  sakes"  (7:2). 

The  connection  between  faith  and  hope  is  similar  to  that  in  First  Peter, 
with  the  added  element  of  yvwcris.  The  author  writes  in  order  that 
with  their  faith  the  readers  may  have  their  yvwo-ts  perfect.  The  three 
dogmas  of  the  Lord  are  hope  of  life,  righteousness,  and  love.  Hope  of  life 
is  the  beginning  and  end  of  our  faith  (i  -.5,  6).  The  new  law  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  is  without  a  yoke  of  constraint  (2:6).  The  covenant  of  the 
beloved  Jesus  is  sealed  unto  our  hearts  in  the  hope  of  faith  in  him  (4:8). 

n.      THE   EPISTLE   OF   JAMES 

The  Epistle  of  James  is  singularly  misunderstood  when  taken  to  repre- 
sent pre-Pauline  Christianity.  It  is  a  practical  homily  arising  probably 
in  the  second  quarter  of  the  second  century,  possibly  somewhat  earlier;  but 
neither  external  attestation  nor  the  conditions  reflected  favor  an  early  date. 
The  author  was  probably  a  Hellenistic  Jew,  but  the  wall  between  Jewish 
and  gentile  Christianity  had  long  been  broken  down,  and  the  homily 
betrays  no  reminiscence  of  the  old  issues.  The  address  "to  the  twelve 
tribes  which  are  of  the  Diaspora,"  in  imitation  it  would  seem  of  I  Pet.  1:1, 
possibly  attached  by  a  later  hand,  is  as  in  First  Peter  figuratively  applied 
to  Christians  in  general.  Hermas  makes  the  same  kind  of  use  of  "the 
twelve  tribes."^  Christians  had  entered  into  the  heritage  of  the  Jews 
as  God's  chosen  people;  Paul's  doctrine  of  Christ's  people  as  the  true 
Israel  passed  over  into  the  consciousness  of  the  church.*  Such  election 
was  ever  conditioned  on  men's  conduct.^  The  mention  of  the  synagogue 
in  2:2  need  not  surprise  us;  Hermas  uses  the  word  in  the  same  way.^ 
The  Ukeness  to  Hermas  suggests  Rome  as  the  place  of  composition.  Both 
are  protests  of  popular  piety  against  the  secularization  of  the  church 
through  wealth  and  intellectual  pride.  The  apocalyptic  element  of  Hermas 
is  wanting  in  the  straightforward  Epistle  of  James;  otherwise  the  general 
conceptions  and  the  conditions  to  which  they  are  addressed  are  the  same. 
James  makes  the  larger  use  of  other  literature ;  his  mind  is  well  furnished 
with  the  Old  Testament  and  later  Jewish  and  Christian  literature,  but  he 
does  not  make  direct  quotations.  The  epistle  is  a  good  specimen  of  the 
Jewish  Wisdom-Uterature  as  it  was  carried  over  into  the  Christian  church, 
and  we  are  reminded  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 

Admonitions  against  erroneous  teachers  are  like  those  of  Hermas.s 

1  Sim.  9:17:1. 

2  As  in  II  Clem.  2:3.  4  Man.  11:9,  13,  14. 

3  II  Pet.  1:10;  Her.  Sim.  8:6:2.         sja.  3:13-18;   Her.  Man.  11;  Sim.  8:9. 

116 


OUTLINE    OF   NEW    TESTAMENT    CHKISTOLOGY  117 

His  characterization  of  pseudo- wisdom  as  psychical  (3:15)  reminds  us  of 
Jude,  vs.  19.  The  intimation  that  some  claim  to  be  tempted  of  God 
(1:13)  recalls  the  murmurers  and  complainers  of  Jude,  vs.  16.  Against 
an  ultra-Pauline  gnosis  he  appeals  for  a  practical  Christianity. 

The  conception  of  Christ  as  the  revealer  of  a  new  and  higher  law  for  the 
government  of  human  life — a  view  common  to  nearly  all  writings  of  the 
latter  part  of  the  first  Christian  century  and  of  the  second — here  finds  strik- 
ing expression.  Outside  of  the  Ebionitic  communities  of  Palestine,  whose 
members  were  the  successors  of  the  Judaizers,  the  name  of  the  apostle 
Paul  was  ever  held  in  high  honor,  and  his  influence  had  entered  permanently 
into  the  Christian  movement.  But  the  Christianity  of  the  latter  part  of 
the  first  century  and  of  the  second  century  was  of  quite  another  type. 
Paul's  teachings  had  grown  out  of  his  own  experience,  and  it  could  not 
be  expected  that  gentiles  and  Hellenistic  Jews  who  had  not  undergone 
the  same  discipline  of  conscience  and  never  possessed  natures  of  such 
religious  depth  should  appreciate  or  understand  his  profound  way  of 
putting  things.  Other  missionaries  had  their  own  way  of  seeing  things, 
and  the  easiest  and  most  natural  way  was  that  of  thinking  of  their  religion 
as  God's  law  revealed  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  freedom  of  the  Christian, 
whether  gentile  or  Jew,  from  all  obligation  to  observe  the  Jewish  cere- 
monial law  was  no  longer  questioned;  the  old  controversy  was  well-nigh 
forgotten.  Among  non-Christian  Hellenistic  Jews  and  proselytes  there 
were  many  to  whom  the  observance  of  ceremonial  rites  meant  almost 
nothing;  their  religion  consisted  of  faith  in  one  God,  his  moral  law,  and 
a  final  judgment.  When  they  became  Christians,  righteousness  still 
consisted  in  obedience  to  the  revealed  law  of  God;  but  it  was  a  "perfect 
law  which  is  of  freedom,"  a  "royal  law"  (i  :25;  2:8,  12);  as  Barnabas  has 
so  happily  put  it,  "the  new  law  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  which  is  without 
a  yoke  of  constraint."^  It  really  meant  a  new  standard  of  living,  and 
practically  just  that  kind  advocated  by  Paul.  But  Paul's  bold  principle 
was  that  the  Christian  is  free  from  all  external  law;  the  very  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  heart  of  the  believer  makes  him  a  free  child  of  God.  For 
Jesus  likewise,  religion  consisted  in  the  filial  relation  to  God  expressing 
itself  in  unselfish  love. 

For  James  the  law  of  Christ  was  not  a  burden,  but  a  blessing,  a  part  of 
the  gospel,  opening  to  men  the  way  of  life,  as  in  Hermas.^  The  man  who 
stands  firm  under  temptation  will,  when  he  has  endured  the  test,  receive 
the  crown  of  life  (i  :i2).  God  chose  the  poor  as  to  the  world  to  be  rich 
in  faith  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom  which  he  promised  to  those  who  love  him 

I  Bar.  a: 6.  3  Sim.  6:11:1. 

117 


118  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

(2:5).     The  parousia  of  the  Lord,  which  is  at  hand,  is  awaited  with  joy 

(5:7,8). 

Paul  thought  of  faith  as  a  spiritual  act  in  which  we  identify  ourselves 

with  Christ  in  his  death  and  resurrection.     For  James  it  is  the  opposite 

of  doubt  and  doublemindedness   (1:6,   8;    2:22),  as  in  Hermas  (Man., 

chap.  9)  and  Second  Clement  (chap.  11),  or  it  is  bare  belief. 

There  is  no  further  reference  to  the  redemptive  work  of  Christ.  James 
calls  himself  "a  bondservant  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ"  (1:1),  and  calls 
him  "the  Lord  of  glory"  (2:1).  The  Lord's  teachings  as  recorded  in  the 
synoptic  gospels  are  drawn  upon.  He  is  the  Judge  standing  before  the 
doors.''  To  him  is  probably  the  reference  in  4:12:  "One  is  lawgiver  and 
judge,  he  who  is  able  to  save  and  to  destroy." 

With  the  conception  of  Jesus  as  a  lawgiver  which  prevailed  in  the  church 
at  this  time  it  will  be  interesting  to  compare  the  view  of  Marcion,  which 
rested  on  a  PauUne  basis  and  excluded  everything  that  did  not  harmonize 
with  the  gospel  preached  by  Paul.  Marcion  was  a  man  of  sincerity, 
energy,  and  deep  religious  faith,  though  in  the  eyes  of  church  writers  he 
was  demon,  firstborn  of  Satan,  Jew,  heathen,  heretic,  and  wolf.  Writing 
in  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  Justin  ISIartyr  says  that  Marcion's 
preaching  had  already  spread  Kara  ttSv  yevos  avOpuinuiv^ — that  is,  in  a 
period  of  about  ten  years.  Unfortunately  we  are  dependent  on  anti- 
heretical  writings  for  his  views. 

Alarcion  was  opposed  to  all  statutory  religion,  and  beHeved  that  the 
prevailing  form  of  Christianity  had  been  corrupted  by  Judaism ;  accordingly 
he  sought  to  sever  Christianity  from  the  Old  Testament.  We  are  not  here 
concerned  with  his  gnostic  views — enough  that  he  popularized  and  simpli- 
fied Gnosticism,  making  it  no  longer  the  secret  doctrine  of  a  school  but  the 
faith  of  a  church  appeaUng  to  the  masses.  What  now  interests  us  is  that 
he  was  able  to  discern  the  religious  peculiarity  of  Christianity  in  distinction 
from  Judaism — to  grasp  the  Pauline  idea  of  Christ's  relation  to  the 
law.  His  disciple  Apelles  held  that  those  who  hoped  in  the  Crucified 
would  be  saved,  if  only  they  were  found  doing  good  works. ^  Tertullian4^ 
reveals  Marcion's  point  of  view:  "Sufficit  unicum  opus  deo  nostro,  quod 
hominem  Uberavit  summa  et  praecipua  bonitate  sua."  Tertullian  complains 
that  the  Marcionites  do  not  fear  God  at  all,  claiming  that  only  a  bad  man 
is  to  be  feared,  while  a  good  man  is  to  be  loved.  If  they  were  asked  why 
then  they  did  not  sin,  they  answered,  "God  forbid!"  (Rom.  6:1,  2).s 

I  5: 9;   see  Apoc.  3:20.  3  Euseb.,  If.  £.  5:13:5. 

»  Apol.  150.  '^  Adv.  Marc.  1:27. 

s  On  Marcion  see  especially  Harnack,  Dogmengeschichte,  I,  S.  254-71  {History  of 
Dogma,  I,  pp.  266-86). 

118 


OUTLINE  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  CHRISTOLOGY        119 
III.   THE  SHEPHERD  OF  HERMAS 

This  work  is  the  most  extensive  that  conies  before  us  for  consideration 
in  our  period.  The  author  was  a  slave  by  birth,  probably  originally  from 
Arcadia  but  sold  by  his  master  to  a  Roman  lady.'  He  seems  to  have 
become  a  freedman  and  to  have  engaged  in  commercial  pursuits.  His 
parables  are  mostly  taken  from  country  life.  He  was  a  humble,  simple- 
minded,  devout  man,  who  was  deeply  sensible  of  evil  within  himself  and 
in  the  church.  His  characteristic  message  is  that  of  repentance.  He 
delivers  his  message  in  apocalyptic  fashion  as  from  divine  messengers. 
The  Muratorian  Fragment  of  the  end  of  the  second  century  says  that  he 
was  brother  of  Pius,  bishop  of  Rome  (140-55  a.  d.).  Internal  evidence 
confirms  this  dating  of  the  book.  The  church  had  experienced  "scourges, 
prisons,  great  tribulations,  crosses,  wild  beasts,  for  the  sake  of  the  Name."^ 
The  work  was  not  produced  at  one  time,  but  probably  stretches  over  a 
period  of  at  least  ten  years. ^  Something  of  a  difficulty  is  raised  by  the 
command  to  Hermas  to  write  two  copies  of  his  book  and  to  send  one  to 
Clement  and  one  to  Grapte,  whereupon  Clement  would  send  his  to  foreign 
cities  and  Grapte  would  admonish  the  widows  and  orphans;  he  himself 
is  to  read  it  in  Rome  along  with  the  presbyters  who  preside  over  the  church. 4 
One  thinks  at  once  of  Clement  of  Rome,  the  author  of  the  letter  written 
to  the  Corinthian  church  about  95  a.  d.,  but  it  is  difficult  to  get  this  work 
back  that  far.     The  name  was  a  common  one  in  Rome. 

The  work  consists  of  five  Visions,  twelve  Commandments,  and  ten 
Parables  (unhappily  called  Similitudes).  The  book  takes  its  name  from 
the  prominent  part  played  in  it  by  the  angel  of  repentance,  who  appeared 
to  Hermas  in  the  guise  of  a  shepherd  and  bade  him  write  down  the  com  • 
mandments  and  parables  he  would  declare  to  him  (Vis.  5). 

Perhaps  we  ought  not  to  look  too  closely  for  Christology  in  Hermas. 
There  are  whole  sections  much  longer  than  the  Epistle  of  James  which 
contain  just  as  little  Christology  as  James.  The  conception  of  Christ  is 
about  that  of  the  church  writings  of  the  period,  but  it  is  not  always  set 
forth  in  the  current  terms.  Christianity  is  the  new  law  and  Christ  the 
Lawgiver:  "Having  then  purged  away  the  sins  of  the  people  he  showed 
them  the  paths  of  life,  giving  them  the  law  which  he  received  from  his 
Father. "5  He  is  also  the  Judge,  who  decides  which  stones  should  be 
accepted  or  rejected  in  the  building  of  his  church.  He  is  the  Councilor 
of  God,  the  holy,  pre-existent  Spirit,  who  created  every  creature,  and 

'  Vis.  1:1:1;  Sim.  9:1:4. 

»Vis.3:2:i.  4Vis.  2:4:3. 

3  Vis.  2:1:1;   5:5;   Sim.  9:1.  5  Sim.  5:6:3. 

119 


120  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

whom  God  made  to  dwell  in  flesh.  The  Spirit  of  God  was  united  with 
the  (Tdp$,  which  was  nobly  subject  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  lived  excellently, 
purely,  vigorously,  and  courageously,  co-operating  with  the  Spirit  (Sim. 
5:6).  The  universality  of  Christ's  saving  mission  is  everywhere  recognized. 
Even  Old  Testament  characters  in  Hades  stood  in  need  that  apostles  and 
teachers  should  preach  to  them  the  name  of  the  Son  of  God  and  administer 
to  them  Christian  baptism  (Sim.  9:16,  17). 

His  favorite  title  for  Christ  is  "the  Son  of  God."  There  is  no  mention 
of  "Jesus"  and  "Christ."  Kvpios  is  used  of  God.  In  the  eighth  parable 
the  angel  shows  Hermas  a  great  vdllow  tree  overshadowing  plains  and 
mountains  and  all  the  earth,  and  under  its  shade  have  come  all  that  are 
called  by  the  name  of  the  Lord.  This  mighty  tree  is  the  Law  of  God 
given  to  go  forth  into  all  the  world;  and  the  Law  is  the  Son  of  God  pro- 
claimed to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  the  peoples  under  the  shade  are  they 
that  hear  the  proclamation  and  believe  on  him.  In  the  ninth  parable 
the  rock  and  the  gate  of  the  tower  are  the  Son  of  God.  The  rock  is  old 
and  the  gate  is  new.  The  rock  is  old  because  the  Son  of  God  is  older  than 
his  creatures;  he  was  Fellow-councilor  with  the  Father  in  the  work  of 
creation.  The  gate  is  new  because  he  became  manifest  in  the  days  of  the 
consummation,  that  those  who  are  to  be  saved  may  enter  by  the  gate  into 
the  kingdom  of  God  (Sim.  9:12). 

A  peculiarity  is  that  he  is  prevailingly  identified  with  the  Holy  Spirit: 
the  Spirit  is  the  Son  of  God  (Sim.  9:1:1).  We  recall  that  this  usage  was  not 
unknown  to  Paul  and  John.  Nor  should  we  be  surprised  that  he  is  asso- 
ciated with  six  angels  as  their  head.  Hermas  knew  nothing  of  the  Logos- 
doctrine.  Before  that  took  possession  of  the  field  there  were  those  in  the 
church  who  expressed  their  conception  of  the  nature  and  office  of  Christ 
by  designating  him  an  angel. 

There  is  no  mention  of  the  birth,  death,  resurrection,  and  ascension  of 
Jesus;  nothing  is  said  of  his  priestly  mediation  and  the  atoning  quality  of 
his  death.  In  his  whole  life  and  activity  he  saves,  preserving  and  purifying 
God's  people,  and  pointing  out  the  path  of  life  by  promulgating  the  divine 
law  (Sim.  5:6:2).  It  would  of  course  be  rash  to  conclude  that  because  in 
general  the  Pauline  conception  of  redemption  is  wanting,  the  author  actually 
excludes  the  expiatory  death, 

Harnack'  reduces  the  christological  conceptions  of  our  period  to  two, 
which  are,  strictly  speaking,  mutually  exclusive:  the  Adoptian  and  the 
Pneumatic.  According  to  the  Adoptian  Christology,  Jesus  is  to  be  regarded 
as  the  man  chosen  by  God,  in  whom  the  Spirit  of  God  dwells;  after  being 

I  Dogmengeschichte,  I,  S.  181-90  {History  of  Dogma,  I,  pp.  190-99). 

120 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHKISTOLOGY  121 

tested  he  was  adopted  by  God  and  invested  with  dominion.  In  the  Pneu- 
matic Christology  Jesus  is  a  heavenly,  spiritual  being  who  took  flesh  and 
returned  to  heaven  after  the  completion  of  his  work  on  earth.  Here  are 
certainly  two  conceptions:  a  man  who  has  become  a  God,  and  a  divine 
being  who  has  appeared  in  human  form.  But  if  Harnack  is  right  in  saying 
that  "only  one  work  has  been  preserved  entire  which  gives  clear  expression 
to  the  Adoptian  Christology,  viz.,  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas,"  then  we  ought 
to  raise  its  Christology  to  the  rank  of  an  independent,  distinctive  type  to  be 
co-ordinated  with  the  great  original  types,  and  to  call  it  "Adoptian  Chris- 
tology." But  this  classification  confuses  more  than  it  helps.  Harnack 
says  that  the  Pneumatic  Christology  may  be  traced  back  to  the  Pauline, 
but  hardly  had  its  point  of  departure  in  Paul  alone,  being  found  also  in 
Hebrews  and  the  Johannine  writings  including  the  Apocalypse,  and  it  is 
represented  by  Barnabas,  First  and  Second  Clement,  Ignatius,  Polycarp, 
and  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  He  might  with  equal  right  have  added  Hermas 
and  all  the  other  Christian  writings  we  have  considered. 

IV.      THE   DIDACHE 

The  Didache  is  a  composite  work,  reflecting  accordingly  several  stand- 
points. In  its  present  form  it  dates  from  about  the  middle  of  the  second 
Christian  century,  finding  its  closest  ethical  and  theological  parallels  in 
Hermas,  James,  and  Second  Clement.  It  has  also  relationship  at  more 
than  one  point  with  Barnabas.  The  proper  title  is:  "Teaching  of  the 
Lord  through  the  Twelve  Aposdes  to  the  Nations."  The  original  docu- 
ment is  doubtless  the  Greek  lying  behind  a  Latin  manuscript  discovered 
by  Schlecht  in  1899,  entided  De  Doctrina  Apostolorum.  This  sets  aside 
the  older  supposition  of  an  original  "Two-Ways  Document."  Schlecht's 
Latin  covers  the  first  six  chapters  of  the  "Teaching"  as  we  have  it  now 
in  the  fuller  form,  omitting  certain  gospel-quotations  and  other  amplifica- 
tions. To  this  was  added  a  church  manual  and  an  apocalyptical  chapter. 
The  rural  atmosphere  of  the  work  in  its  expanded  form  would  indicate 
that  it  originated  not  in  Alexandria  but  in  Upper  Egypt.  However,  in 
spite  of  the  great  mass  of  Egyptian  papyri  from  the  second  century  now 
known  to  us,  very  little  of  the  papyri  shows  Christian  influence. 

The  author  regards  Christianity  in  the  aspect  presented  in  Second 
Clement,  as  the  truth  made  known  to  us  by  Christ. .  The  point  of  view  is 
brought  out  in  the  beautiful  eucharistic  prayers:  "We  give  thee  thanks, 
our  Father,  for  the  life  and  knowledge  which  thou  hast  made  known  to  us 
through  Jesus  thy  servant"  (9:3).  "We  give  thee  thanks,  holy  Father, 
for  thy  holy  name  which  thou  hast  made  to  dwell  in  our  hearts,  and  for  the 

121 


122  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

knowledge  and  faith  and  immortality  which  thou  hast  made  known  to  us 

through  Jesus  thy  servant On   us   thou   hast  bestowed  spiritual 

food  and  drink  and  life  everlasting  through  thy  Servant Remember, 

Lord,  thy  church  to  deliver  her  from  all  evil  and  to  perfect  her  in  thy  love, 
and  to  gather  her  from  the  four  winds,  sanctified,  into  thy  kingdom,  which 
thou  hast  prepared  for  her.  For  thine  is  the  power  and  the  glory  forever. 
Let  grace  come  and  this  world  pass  away !  Hosanna  to  the  God  of  David !" 
(chap.  lo). 

Baptism  is,  after  preparatory  fasting,  to  be  administered  in  the  name 
of  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Spirit  (chap.  7).  The  eucharist 
is  spiritual  food  and  drink,  securing  eternal  life,  as  we  have  seen  (10:3); 
it  is  also  the  offering  of  the  church,  answering  to  the  Old  Testament  sacrifice, 
valid  only  as  accompanied  by  confession  of  sin  and  brotherly  love  (chap.  14). 
Its  Pauline  connection  with  the  death  of  Christ  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
is  not  here  indicated.  However,  the  broken  bread  which  was  scattered 
over  the  hills  and  brought  together  and  made  one,  symbolizing  the  church 
gathered  from  the  ends  of  the  earth  into  the  kingdom  (9:4),  reminds  one 
of  I  Cor.  10: 16,  17. 

The  closing  chapter  is  a  bit  of  apocalyptic,  drawn  in  part  from  the 
Synoptic  Gospels,  and  in  part,  it  would  seem,  from  Barnabas  (4:9).  We 
have  the  last  time,  the  false  prophets,  the  world-seducer  like  a  son  of  God, 
an  apostasy  on  the  part  of  some,  an  opening  in  heaven,  the  voice  of  a 
trumpet,  the  resurrection  of  the  saints,  the  coming  of  the  Lord  upon  the 
clouds  of  heaven  (chap.  16). 

V.      SECOND   CLEMENT 

Second  Clement  appears  to  be  in  the  strict  sense  a  homily  or  sermon 
(17:3;  19: 1 ),  whether  actually  preached  or  not.  Harnack,  however,  identi- 
fies it  with  the  long-lost  letter  which  the  Roman  Christians  under  Bishop 
Soter  (165-75  A-  D-)  sent  to  the  Corinthians,  and  which  was  by  them  to  be 
preserved  along  with  the  genuine  letter  of  Clement.^  Lightfoot  thinks  that 
it  was  an  anonymous  Corinthian  sermon,  chap.  7  breathing  the  atmosphere 
of  the  stadium.  Its  traditional  connection  with  First  Clement  and  the 
kinship  in  thought  to  Hermas  point  toward  Rome  as  its  source.  On  the 
other  hand  the  points  of  contact  in  thought  with  the  Didache  and  with 
Second  Peter  and  its  use  of  an  apocryphal  gospel,  probably  that  to  the 
Egyptians,  suggest  Egypt.  The  word  of  the  Lord  cited  in  12:2  is,  accord- 
ing to  Clement  of  Alexandria,^  from  the  Gospel  according  to  the  Egyptians, 

1  Euseb.,  H.  E.  4:23:11. 

2  Strom.  3: 13. 

122 


OUTLINE    OP   NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  123 

and  presumably  other  gospel  quotations  that  are  not  otherwise  known 
to  us  are  from  the  same  source  (4 :  5 ;  5 :  3 ;  8 :  5).  At  any  rate  it  is  a  typical 
Christian  writing  from  about  the  middle  of  the  second  century.  The 
Pauline  coloring  of  First  Clement  is  wanting. 

The  christological  standpoint  is  indicated  in  the  opening  words  and 
in  the  closing  doxology.  "Brethren,  we  ought  to  think  of  Jesus  Christ 
as  of  a  God — as  of  a  Judge  of  living  and  dead"  (1:1).  For,  he  goes  on 
to  say,  to  think  meanly  of  him  would  be  to  place  a  low  estimate  upon  our 
Christian  salvation.  Faith  in  the  deity  of  Christ  meant  a  corresponding 
estimate  of  the  Christian  religion,  which  as  compared  with  Judaism  and 
paganism  was  the  absolute  religion — a  position  emphasized  in  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  and  the  Fourth  Gospel.  Of  course  the  relation  of  Christ 
to  the  Father  and  to  the  Holy  Spirit  is  not  yet  defined  as  it  was  later.  A 
passage  from  Isaiah  is  quoted  as  the  word  of  Christ  (3:4),  and  a  saying 
of  Jesus  in  the  gospels  is  ascribed  to  God  (13:4).  The  ascription  of 
salvation  now  to  God  and  now  to  Christ  is  common  in  Ignatius  and  the 
Johannine  theology.  So  also  Christ  is  identified  with  the  Spirit:  "If 
Christ  the  Lord  who  saved  us,  though  he  was  first  Spirit,  became  flesh 
and  thus  called  us,  then  we  also  shall  receive  the  reward  in  this  flesh"  (9:5). 
In  14:4  Christ  is  again  said  to  be  the  Spirit.  So  in  Hermas  the  pre-existent 
Christ  is  pre-eminently  the  Spirit,  to  whom  other  spirits  are  subordinate. 
The  Johannine  writings  were  apparently  not  known  to  either  Clement  or 
Hermas. 

The  connection  of  Christ  with  truth  and  immortality  is  brought  out 
in  the  final  doxology:  "To  the  only  invisible  God,  Father  of  the  truth, 
who  sent  us  the  Savior  and  Prince  of  incorruption,  through  whom  also  he 
revealed  to  us  the  truth  and  the  heavenly  life,  to  him  be  the  glory  unto  the 
ages.  Amen"  (20:5).  Christ's  revelation  of  God,  immortality,  and  the 
way  of  life  forms  the  very  center  of  this  writer's  Christology.  Through 
Christ,  who  has  displayed  so  great  mercy  toward  us,  we  know  the  Father 
of  truth  (3:1).  "He  has  graciously  given  us  light;  as  a  father  he  has 
addressed  us  as  sons;  he  has  saved  us  when  we  were  perishing"  (1:4). 
"Thus  also  did  the  Christ  desire  to  save  the  things  which  were  perishing,  and 
saved  many  by  his  coming  and  calling  us  when  we  were  already  perishing" 
(2 : 7).  The  Pauline  use  of  the  death  of  Christ  in  this  connection  is  almost 
wholly  absent;    in  1:2  we  read:    "he  submitted  to  suffer  for  our  sakes." 

Gradually  the  Greek  spirit  displaced  the  Jewish.  The  Jewish  idea 
of  the  visible  kingdom  to  be  established  on  earth  in  the  new  age  at  Christ's 
second  coming  was  practically  supplanted  by  the  hope  of  the  heavenly, 
eternal  life  in  the  presence  of  God  and  Christ  and  the  saints.     In  some 

123 


124  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC    STUDIES 

circles  the  Jewish  idea  of  the  earthly  messianic  kingdom  persisted.  Yet  the 
transition  from  the  dualism  of  Jewish  apocalj'pticism  to  the  gentile  dualism 
of  matter  and  spirit  was  not  difl&cult.  "This  age  and  the  coming  age  are 
two  enemies"  (6:3).  The  corollary  to  the  older  messianic  idea  was  the 
resurrection  of  the  body.  Even  Paul  placed  emphasis  on  the  spiritual 
side;  the  resurrection  was  a  part  of  redemption  from  the  flesh.  But  it 
is  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh  of  which  Second  Clement  speaks  (9:1-5), 
as  is  also  true  of  First  Clement. 

Another  aspect  of  his  Christology  is  found  in  the  relation  between 
Christ  and  the  church.  Those  who  do  the  will  of  God  are  of  the  first,  the 
spiritual  church,  which  was  created  before  sun  and  moon — the  church  of 
the  life,  the  living  church  which  is  the  body  of  Christ.  God  made  man 
male  and  female;  the  male  is  Christ,  the  female  the  church  (14:1-3). 
Likewise  Hermas  teaches  that  the  church  was  created  before  all  things, 
and  the  world  was  formed  for  her  sake.^ 

VI.      THE   EPISTLES   OF   JUDE   AND    SECOND   PETER 

I .     Jude 

This  short  and  vigorous  epistle  probably  dates  from  near  the  middle 
of  the  second  century,  though  it  may  be  much  earlier.  It  is  possible  that 
the  words  dScX^os  8e  'Iokw^Sow  did  not  stand  in  the  original,  in  which  case 
the  work  is  not  pseudonymous.  The  use  of  the  Book  of  Enoch  and  of 
the  Assumption  of  Moses  and  the  writer's  possible  knowledge  of  the  Car- 
pocratian  heresy  suggest  Alexandria  as  the  place  of  composition. 

The  aim  and  spirit  of  the  letter  are  seen  in  the  opening  exhortation  to 
contend  for  the  faith  which  was  once  for  all  delivered  to  the  saints  (vs.  3). 
As  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  faith  is  the  deposit  handed  down  from  apostolic 
days  (vs.  20).  The  occasion  for  the  epistle  is  the  existence  of  a  presumptu- 
ous and  aggressive  gnostic  libertinism.  It  is  evident  that  they  were  liber- 
tines on  principle;  that  their  libertinism  was  bound  up  with  their  gnostic 
system  and  justified  by  it:  they  turned  the  grace  of  God  into  lasciviousness 
(vs.  4),  in  their  dreamings  they  defiled  the  flesh  (vs.  8),  their  mouth  spoke 
pompous  words  (vs.  16),  and  they  made  divisions,  being  themselves  psychi- 
cal, having  not  the  Spirit,  though  as  implied  they  claimed  the  contrary 
(vs.  19).  They  perverted  Paul's  doctrine  of  grace  and  freedom:  for  them 
all  things  were  lawful  and  they  continued  in  sin  (I  Cor.  6:12;  Rom.  6:1). 
It  was  just  this  that  the  followers  of  Carpocrates  and  his  son  Epiphanes 
did.  The  Gnostics  also  recognized  two  classes  of  men:  the  spiritual, 
capable  of  the  higher  wisdom,  who  separated  themselves  from  the  mass  of 

I  Vis.  2:4:1. 

124 


OUTLINE    OF    NEW    TESTAMENT    CHRISTOLOGY  125 

Christians;  and  the  inferior,  psychical  natures.  Against  the  pernicious 
teaching  and  living  of  these  antinomians  the  author  appeals  to  the  words 
spoken  beforehand  by  the  apostles  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  foretold 
that  in  the  last  time  such  scoffers  would  appear  (vss.  17,  18) — an  apparent 
reference  to  the  Pastoral  Epistles. 

The  writer  calls  himself  " a  bondservant  of  Jesus  Christ"  and  addresses 
his  letter  to  "the  called,  beloved  in  God  the  Father  and  kept  for  Jesus 
Christ"  (vs.  i).  The  false  teachers  denounced,  who  appear  still  to  have 
met  with  the  Christians  in  their  love  feasts  (vs.  12),  not  only  set  at  nought 
dominion  (KvpioTrjTa)  and  blasphemed  glories  (8o|as,  perhaps  angels, 
vs.  8),  but  even  "denied  our  only  Master  (Aco-ttotj^v)  and  Lord,  Jesus 
Christ"  (vs.  4).  Such  denial  may  have  been  the  docetic  denial  of  his  true 
humanity,  combated  by  Ignatius,  or  the  denial  that  the  man  Jesus  was 
the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  referred  to  in  I  John  2:22.  The  readers  are 
to  keep  themselves  in  the  love  of  God,  "awaiting  the  mercy  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  unto  life  eternal,"  and  putting  forth  efforts  to  reclaim  these 
false  teachers  (vss.  21,  22).  The  epistle  closes  with  a  Pauline  doxology, 
like  that  subjoined  to  Romans. 

II.     Second  Peter 

Nearly  the  whole  of  Jude  is  incorporated  substantially,  but  not  very 
happily,  in  II  Pet.  2:1 — t,:t,.  Second  Peter  is  a  pseudonymous  work  in 
the  strictest  sense,  arising  probably  in  the  second  half  of  the  second  century. 
The  use  of  the  name  of  Peter  suggests  Rome  for  its  origin;  the  use  of  Jude 
points  toward  Egypt.  The  reference  to  Peter's  approaching  death  seems 
to  recall  the  chapter  added  to  the  Fourth  Gospel  (1:14;  John  21:18,  19). 
The  author  lacks  the  culture  and  depth  of  the  writer  of  First  Peter.  The 
differences  between  the  two  epistles  are  fundamental  throughout.  The 
Paulinism,  the  use  made  of  the  example,  the  sufferings  and  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ  in  First  Peter  are  wanting  in  Second  Peter. 

The  key- word  of  First  Peter  is  hope;  that  of  Second  Peter  is  knowledge 
(yvcio-is,  cTTiyvwcns,  1:2,  3,  6,  8;  2:20,  21;  3:18).  The  writer  is  an 
opponent  of  the  Gnostics,  and  yet  betrays  an  unconscious  sympathy  with 
their  way  of  thinking. '     Yet  knowledge  is  for  him  of  a  practical  and 

•  The  type  of  Gnosticism  represented  by  Marcion  and  Apelles  cannot  justly  be 
charged  with  identifying  Christianity  and  knowledge;  indeed,  if  such  identification 
is  Gnosticism,  then  their  opponents  were  the  Gnostics.  Apelles  said  that  he  was 
persuaded  that  there  was  one  principle  {y-ia.  &px^),  but  how  he  did  not  know;  he 
believed  there  was  one  unbegotten  God,  but  he  did  not  know  the  how  of  it.  Rhodon 
laughed  and  reproved  him  because,  though  calling  himself  a  teacher,  he  knew  not  how 
to  confirm  what  he  taught  (Euseb.,  H.  E.  5:13:7). 

125 


126  HISTORICAL    AND    LINGUISTIC   STUDIES 

religious  character,  including  all  things  that  belong  to  life  and  piety  (1:3). 
A  Greek  idea  of  which  the  Gnostics  made  much — participation  in  the 
divine  nature  and  liberation  from  the  corruption  of  the  world — is  here 
appropriated  (1:4).  The  authorities  for  Christian  truth  are  the  words 
spoken  by  the  holy  prophets  and  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  and  Savior 
through  the  apostles  (3:2).  Paul's  epistles  are  ranked  high,  being  asso- 
ciated with  "the other  scriptures"  (ras  AoiTras  ypa^as),  which  the  unlearned 
and  unsteadfast  twist  to  their  own  destruction,  as  encouraging  to  license 
(3:15,  16). 

Faith  in  the  second  coming  of  Christ  for  salvation  and  judgment  had 
been  growing  faint  in  some  quarters  on  account  of  the  long  delay  (3:4). 
The  Gnostics  rejected  early  Christian  eschatology,  including  the  second 
coming  of  Christ  and  the  establishment  of  his  kingdom  on  earth  and  the 
resurrection  of  the  body.  The  fact  is  that  this  very  tendency  is  apparent 
in  general  Christian  literature  at  the  time.  But  our  author  assures  them 
that  the  day  of  the  Lord  is  to  come  suddenly,  the  world  is  to  be  destroyed 
by  fiire,  and  from  the  wreck  shall  emerge  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth, 
in  which  dwells  righteousness  (3:10-13).  The  glory  of  the  Transfigura- 
tion is  pledge  of  a  greater  glory  to  be  revealed  in  the  parousia  (1:16-18). 
At  the  second  advent  is  to  be  ushered  in  "the  eternal  kingdom  of  our  Lord 
and  Savior  Jesus  Christ"  (i :  11). 

False  teachers  who  introduce  destructive  divisions  (ai/jeVeis)  deny  the 
Master  who  bought  them  (tov  dyopacravTa  aurows  htcnTonqv,  2:1). 

Second  Peter  marks  chronologically  the  close  of  the  New  Testament 
period. 


126 


CONCLUDING  REMARKS 

When  we  in  our  modem  world  interpret  Jesus  anew  in  the  light  of  our 
new  experiences,  we  are  but  doing  what  men  of  the  first  and  second  Chris- 
tian centuries  did,  and  what  men  have  been  doing  ever  since.  In  the 
reconstruction  of  our  theological  thinking  that  is  now  taking  place,  a  new 
Christology  is  demanded;  or,  if  we  prefer  not  to  use  the  word  Christology 
in  this  connection,  a  new  estimate  of  him  whose  life  is  the  light  of  men, 
brought  into  relation  with  the  rest  of  our  knowledge.  Many  factors  are 
entering  into  the  situation.  One  of  them  must  be  an  understanding  of 
the  way  in  which  men  have  thought  about  Jesus  in  other  ages.  We  have 
undertaken  a  study  of  the  first  period,  which  we  are  accustomed  to  think 
of  as  the  richest  and  most  creative  that  has  yet  been  witnessed.  It  has 
been  thought  that  a  study  of  this  character,  designed  in  a  purely  historical 
spirit,  might  contribute  toward  the  construction  of  the  new  Christology. 
There  may  be  found  in  the  foregoing  pages  no  suggestion  as  to  what  use 
the  theologian  shall  make  of  the  material  offered.  We  have  been  dealing 
largely  with  time-forms  and  symbols,  content  to  leave  to  others  an  inter- 
pretation of  the  larger  meanings. 

A  genetic  study  of  this  character  is  now  for  the  first  time  possible.  A 
glance  at  the  selected  bibliography  will  suggest  how  recent  is  the  literature 
dealing  with  the  subject.  The  larger  part  falls  within  the  present  century. 
Biblical  theology  has  already  accomplished  much  in  the  discovery  and 
presentation  of  the  religious  thought  of  persons  and  books  in  the  New 
Testament,  but  until  recently  has  not  undertaken  the  more  comprehensive 
task  of  presenting  that  thought  in  its  genetic  relations  and  development. 
Now  that  New  Testament  study  has  entered  upon  this  new  phase,  it  is 
hoped  that  there  may  be  found  in  these  pages  a  helpful  presentation  in 
outline  of  the  rise  and  development  of  primitive  Christology  as  reflected 
in  the  Christian  literature  of  the  New  Testament  period. 


127]  127 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


SOct'SUSP 
NOV  13  1958  Lfcj 


\t;.T 


>?ECD  no 
JAN  23  1630 


LD  21-100m-9,'47(A5702sl6)476 


:*>S:^S 


;-;^i  ■-'<»;■  ^''^f'  : -  ■'■•'. 


:-.p;^|;-, 


